Skip to content

PB Predictions Competition 2025 – The Results – politicalbetting.com

124

Comments

  • StarryStarry Posts: 132

    HYUFD said:

    If I were Kemi I’d be very relaxed about Zahawi going.

    The more the discredited old guard go, the easier it becomes to move forwards with a new proposition.

    Kemi this morning, 'Oh dear, I have lost Zahawi, Nadine Dorries, Gullis, Kruger, Berry, Andrea Jenkyns. Who next will follow them to Reform? Liz Truss? I will keep the champagne on ice!'
    I’m rather surprised La Truss hasn’t moved over yet. The only reason I can think she hasn’t is that:

    (a) she really wants a big press conference with Farage, and he knows that he literally can’t be pictured anywhere near her and retain credibility so he’s telling her where to go; or

    (b) she thinks she can time it for maximum “impact” (eg after the local elections).

    What poor Liz probably doesn’t get is that any announcement of which party she’s in will immediately lob a hand grenade at that party’s fortunes. Champagne corks would be popping at Tory HQ if she went to Reform.
    I suspect Reform have probably told her not to join until after a GE. I do think these ex-Tory MPs will impact Reform when there's much more scrutiny in the run-up to a general election. There's plenty of ammunition to counter 'none of the above' if the ones on Question Time are career politicians and former chairs of the Tory Party with a track record of denouncing Reform.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 17,571

    Cookie said:

    Off thread - I saw this on facebook the other day. It's actually quite a good shorthand for 'what does the electorate think about the rest of the world'.


    Full detail and background here: https://brilliantmaps.com/positive-opinions-uk/?fbclid=IwY2xjawPRvq1leHRuA2FlbQIxMABzcnRjBmFwcF9pZBAyMjIwMzkxNzg4MjAwODkyAAEeg7_zc_JD8Fa0IKqcSdmDUJgE6DMha0roODZ8AbKZfcHgC6pkdnL5ubhkhAA_aem_Ow7KFARYWADhrWc16eezmA

    In short, we like New Zealand, Canada and Australia, and also Scandinavia, and also Spain.

    @Gardenwalker may be interested given his recent article and his antecedents.

    The US number is a sad reflection on how Trump has tarnished his country's reputation. It is viewed less favourably than Mexico and its score is notably weak when compared to other Anglophone countries. The other interesting number is Japan, that is a country that Brits seem to have warmed to significantly over my lifetime.
    ...as the ones who fought them in WW2 have died, perhaps?
    Yes I think that's a big part of it. The rise of China probably a factor too with Japan seen as the friendly power in the region. And Japanese culture is very popular especially with younger people.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 26,409
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    More socialism on the cards...

    U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright says the U.S. taking ownership stakes in oil companies is a real possibility, signaling a major shift in energy and national security strategy.
    https://x.com/zywiremedia1/status/2010387313931813070

    Shades of Nixon's (other crooked socialist) price controls.

    Trump telling Raytheon how to manage their finances and credit card companies how much interest they can charge are FAR left positions.

    The Constitution doesn’t give the Executive that power.

    You can make all the excuses you want, but you know that’s true

    https://x.com/johncardillo/status/2010544143903158403

    Nixon at least went through Congress with some of his shit.
    Who'd have thought in 2010 that the Soviet Union would make a miraculous comeback and win the Cold War?
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 27,132
    Foss said:

    Cookie said:

    Off thread - I saw this on facebook the other day. It's actually quite a good shorthand for 'what does the electorate think about the rest of the world'.


    Full detail and background here: https://brilliantmaps.com/positive-opinions-uk/?fbclid=IwY2xjawPRvq1leHRuA2FlbQIxMABzcnRjBmFwcF9pZBAyMjIwMzkxNzg4MjAwODkyAAEeg7_zc_JD8Fa0IKqcSdmDUJgE6DMha0roODZ8AbKZfcHgC6pkdnL5ubhkhAA_aem_Ow7KFARYWADhrWc16eezmA

    In short, we like New Zealand, Canada and Australia, and also Scandinavia, and also Spain.

    @Gardenwalker may be interested given his recent article and his antecedents.

    The US number is a sad reflection on how Trump has tarnished his country's reputation. It is viewed less favourably than Mexico and its score is notably weak when compared to other Anglophone countries. The other interesting number is Japan, that is a country that Brits seem to have warmed to significantly over my lifetime.
    The upswing in Japan's rep is probably a combination of the WW2 die off ('very cruel race' to quote Bridget Jones), good quality electronics and cars but - thanks to the 80s crash - no consummate perceived rise in threat.
    Combined with their prolonged period of democracy and not forgetting the rise in popularity of sushi.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 16,241

    theProle said:

    algarkirk said:

    dixiedean said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Good riddance to more bad rubbish

    @GuidoFawkes

    BREAKING: Former Chancellor Nadhim Zahawi defects to Reform UK

    I thought the tide was turning inexorably away from Reform and to the Tories?
    On second thoughts maybe this is confirmation.
    There is a good discussion here - Shipman and company -;

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=inYaXCHl6is

    about Reform's need to recruit high calibre in high quantities.

    Zahawi is too careless. Anyone of course can make careless errors with the HMRC that leads to having to pay £5,000,000 following investigation. It happens to me all the time. But it does mean you are not quite what the Reform team are looking for. The lack of high quality, transparently decent and credible recruits is a big problem for them, unless they are hiding a lot of lights under a lot of bushels.

    My 6th place - thank you Ben Pointer - inspires me to repeat that by the end of 2026 Reform will not have a commanding poll lead. And in the next GE they will come second or third in votes and seats.
    Who do you forsee replacing them in the running?
    Labour seem to be continuing unchanged on a straight line decline in the polling which presumably has to flatten off somewhere, but it's a stretch to imagine a way back up for them from here. Every week it's another u-turn or an unforced error, their coalition splinters a fraction more, and every week their numbers decline further.

    The LDs have been consistently useless, uninteresting, and have no narrative or answers.

    The Tories are just about treading water, despite Kemi's best PMQs performances (barring her terrible showing last week) in ages. But that's the problem with a pitch which boils down to "Farage is right, so vote for me". She demolishes Starmer easily, but gets herself no credit, because of his endless chant back of "fourteen years".

    So barring a second coming of the SDP, or "Your Party" suddenly discovering hitherto unknown levels of organisational ability (like agreeing if they actually are a party or not), the only rising star left in town is Zac. He's clearly eating up the left end of the labor vote at a rate of knots, but once that's been consumed, where does he go then? He's not going to appeal to many Tories, probably not many LDs. And I think Farage's populists probably for the most part prefer Farage's populism to Zac's.


    Which leaves the only other possibly being for Farage to do or say something so beyond the pail his voter go off to DNV. But I think he's pretty good at not doing that.
    I listened to a New Statesman podcast with a friend of this site the other day, making the point that fugures like Boris and Corbyn had a core vote that meant their VI had an effective floor. Starmer has no core vote - therefore his Government has no effective floor.
    I think we shall find that it doesn't have a floor until it does. We are years off a general election and there is much to happen. I think it has already been found that the Tories have a possible route to recovery; in the course of only a few months the talk has gone from 'extinction' to 'road to government not impossible'. As long as it remains true that someone has to form a government and that the general voting patten in GB is roughly split between right of centre and left of centre then Labour will have support; that is until something quite new happens like Greens being seen as a possible government, or LDs being seen as genuinely contesting 400 not 100 seats. Neither of these is in sight.

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 85,187

    Nigelb said:

    More socialism on the cards...

    U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright says the U.S. taking ownership stakes in oil companies is a real possibility, signaling a major shift in energy and national security strategy.
    https://x.com/zywiremedia1/status/2010387313931813070

    That'll larn 'em not to invest in Venezuela.

    Although the political risk of developing projects in the US is now highly elevated.
    The smart ones have found a loophole.

    U.S. President Donald J. Trump said on Sunday that he might block Exxon Mobil, the largest oil company in the United States, from investing in Venezuela after the company’s CEO called the country “uninvestable” during a White House meeting with oil executives last week, according to Reuters. “I didn't like Exxon's response,” Trump told reporters on Air Force One on his way back to Washington on Sunday. “I'll probably be inclined to keep Exxon out...
    https://x.com/sentdefender/status/2010534645700362646
  • glwglw Posts: 10,667
    Sandpit said:

    Rumours that Iranian authorities have bought from China powerful radio transmitter weapons to block signals from satellite phones and Starlink terminals, that protestors were using to get news out of the country.

    A theory I've read is that they are blocking/interfering with GPS. So it's not the Starlink signals being blocked, but when GPS is blocked or spoofed the Starlink terminals are less able to determine their location (for pointing/beamforming) and the signalling is degraded due to less accurate timing.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 21,777
    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sandpit said:

    Congratulations to @Driver on the win, and to @Benpointer for organising.

    Sets reminder to self, to remember to enter the competition this year!

    We're just finalising the questions.

    We've got some proper elections to predict in 2026.
    There were national elections in Germany, Canada and Australia last year.

    This year the only major national elections are the US midterms and the New Zealand election
    Q1. Will the 2026 US midterms be free and fair? A1 Yes 0 :No 10 points.
    They probably will overall, it is state governments that run them not the Federal government anyway
    US elections are never that fair, because gerrymandering is so embedded.

    Has anyone done a list of who controls the process in the competitive districts? It shouldn't matter, but unfortunately it might.
    I’m always shocked at the amount of political micromanaging that goes on around US elections, with town mayors deciding things such as the location and opening hours of ballot boxes.

    Which of course they engineer to make sure their opponents’ voters face long queues, it’s all quite nakedly partisan.

    The US House is now so Gerrymandered that only a couple of dozen seats change hands, even when there’s a relatively large swing in the vote.

    Even attempts to tighten up rules such as voter ID, are fought along party lines.
    Downside of the "direct electoral accountability for everything" model that the USA tends towards.

    Some things are better done by technocrats working to explicit and democratically-agreed mandates.
    Yes, for all that we critisise politics the UK is actually very good at organising elections themselves.

    We generally wake up in the morning after a general election, with a pretty good idea of what’s happening. Only 2010 comes to mind as being up in the air for a few days, at least since the ‘70s.
    I don't think Ireland, with a fully proportional system takes much longer, does it?
    Generally speaking Ireland takes two days to get most of the count completed, though everyone has a pretty good idea of the overall result by the first lunchtime because the party workers observing the count (called tallymen) come up with very accurate tallies much more quickly. This is probably why they don't simply double/triple the number of counters in order to get the count completed in one day.

    It took quite a long time after the last election to finalise the coalition deal, nearly two months. I think in the end they only felt the need to get it done so that a government was in place before Trump was inaugurated.

    Ireland's system is STV, which is slower to count than a simple, directly proportional system, would be.
    STV is a shite system. The number of seats a party wins in a constituency is influenced by how many candidates they field.

    No such nonsense with D'Hondt. The gold standard system for multi-member constituencies.
    "D'Hondt" was a Belgian civil servant who gave his name to a particular formula often used to calculate the number of seats according to the propoortion of votes cast. The D'Hondt Formula is the one used to calculate the seats in an STV election. STV is the D'Hondt process in action.
    STV is a bastardised version.

    One vote for one party. Party lists. Happy days.
    I rather like STV because it gives you as a
    voter a real say over the candidates as well as the party. Say party X will definitely win one member and maybe two in a five member seat and puts up three candidates. Those candidates will put more effort into being the first ranked candidate within the party slate than competing with candidates from other parties.
    This sort of thing is going to vary by constituency, but in a geographically large constituency like Cork South-West what tends to happen with multiple candidates is that they will work different parts of the constituency.

    So you might have one candidate who was better known on the eastern end of the constituency and would concentrate on campaigning in Bandon and Clonakilty, while the other candidate focused on the Western end around Bantry and Castletownbere. Though sometimes the intra-party rivalries can be very strong.

    RTÉ did a great series of podcasts on every constituency before the last election in Ireland and I'd recommend listening to at least a few of them to gain a sense of how the local party politics plays out.

    https://www.rte.ie/radio/podcasts/series/41642-know-your-constituency/
    Yes. The degree to which voters influence the ranking of candidates under STV depends on how much attention they are paying (not much). But the fact candidates are assessed against each other does raise their game a bit I think.
    STV is likely to play out quite a bit differently if ever used at Westminster than in Ireland because there's more than three times as many people per elected representative. Politics is surprisingly personal in Ireland. Voters know their local politicians in Ireland in a way that simply doesn't happen in Britain.

    I talked to the people canvassing for Fine Gael before the last election, and it was surprising how much of the conversation between them and my mother-in-law was about who in the local party was related to our family, and who the candidate they were canvassing for was related to (he was the son of a former shopowner in Dunmanway), and my mother-in-law knew the canvassers well anyway.

    One of the factors to consider is how many MPs to elect pet constituency. The higher that number is the more intra-party competition you force into the system, because it becomes more likely that parties will expect to elect multiple MPs, and harder for them to predict exactly how many. But there are drawbacks with larger constituencies too.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 57,302

    It is a bit weird that Trump is upset with Iran for clamping down on protests against secret police with deadly force.

    You are looking for logic in the actions of the Orange one. Rookie mistake.
  • TazTaz Posts: 23,905

    Taz said:

    Wordle in 2 today. Not sure how anybody got it in 2 yesterday!

    Was that Oomph ? I play in a Twitter Wordle league (I know !) and every week the top guys and gals get at least three on the second go.

    Cheats.
    The one I was playing was QUARK.... Q and K on second guess? Possible, but...
    Oomph must have been earlier in the week
  • TazTaz Posts: 23,905

    Taz said:

    HYUFD said:

    Taz said:

    HYUFD said:

    Taz said:

    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    Thanks for this, Ben, and "Ho, hum" for my predictions.

    Does anyone get the impression that there seemed to be very little reviewing of 2025 both on PB and across the wider media? If ever a year slipped into history unloved and unmarked, 2025 was it, and perhaps it is a wider malaise than simply Starmer or Trump or any one of the news stories this year.

    And yet, and this is true for most years, and is an important corollary to the go and vote / politics is vital brigade: how often does politics directly turn the course of somebody's life on here? Despite Trump, despite Labour, despite war and refugees and all, most years and last year, the effects of politics on my life were very much at the margins and I think most people can say the same. So, however mad it gets out there, remember it remains a niche and peripheral interest.

    Perhaps politics will come for me this year, and perhaps it is naive to be complacent about it, but more likely "They'll burn down the synagogues at 6 o'clock, and we'll all carry on like before".

    A really interesting post, for which many thanks.

    2024 was always going to be a hard act to follow for this site - having both a UK General Election and a US Presidential election in the same year is basically two trips to the buffet on the same day and it's fair to say many on here didn't like either result. A world with Sunak as Prime Minister and Harris as President would be a very different place, you'd imagine.

    As to the day-to-day impact of politics, what happens locally affects me more than what happens nationally in the short term (the longer term is different). We have in 2026 local elections here in London and that will have an impact even though I imagine barely a third of those who can vote will vote.

    We are all political or politics enthusiasts - we wouldn't be here otherwise. Sometimes, we like to see change before it manifests more broadly and spot trends before they become obvious -the betting part of the site plays to that.

    We all have our agendas, our teams and our flags and the debates/arguments reflect those. Too often we revisit old battles simply because we can but as the annual prediction contest shows, trying to read the runes of the future - well, I'd have more chance of going through the card at Lingfield this afternoon.
    A world with Sunak as PM still and Harris as US President would have been better for Ukraine, better for the UK economy and business owners, wealthy pensioners and property owners and farmers, better for woke in the US, worse for Putin and Netanyahu, worse for UK train drivers and GPs and those claiming lots of welfare and better for the global free market which would still be largely tariff free and better for tackling climate change. It would have been good for trans in the US, not so good for trans in the UK.

    It would also have been a better world for those who like slick and articulate leaders, which Sunak and Harris were clearly more than Starmer and Trump. Most of the white working class and lower middle class in both nations though clearly rejected Sunak and Harris for what they thought would be straightforward common sense with Starmer and Trump
    I’m not sure Harris would be better for the economy. Her plan to tax unrealised gains as wealth was stupid.

    The US economy is forecast to grow at 5.4% in the final quarter. Harris woilent achieve that.
    Not her tax and spend plans no, though Harris would not have imposed the tariffs on US imports Trump has which are increasing US prices
    No they’re not. Evidence is most of the costs are being absorbed.

    There’s still a strong chance they’re overturned.

    https://www.reuters.com/world/us/how-united-states-is-eating-trumps-tariffs-2025-10-13/#:~:text=Imported goods have become 4%,domestic products rose by 2%.
    'Cavallo and researchers Paola Llamas and Franco Vazquez have been tracking the price of 359,148 goods, from carpets to coffee, at major online and brick-and-mortar retailers in the United States.
    They found that imported goods have become 4% more expensive since Trump started imposing tariffs in early March, while the price of domestic products rose by 2%.'
    https://www.reuters.com/world/us/how-united-states-is-eating-trumps-tariffs-2025-10-13/#:~:text=Imported goods have become 4%,domestic products rose by 2%
    I didn’t say costs hadn’t increased just that most of the increase had been absorbed.
    We cannot on the one hand bemoan Reform's lack of Government experience, and on the other complain when they get some. Zahawi isn't a top flight signing, but he knows how things work for better and worse.
    What relevance is that to tariff inflation in the US ?
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 17,571

    It is a bit weird that Trump is upset with Iran for clamping down on protests against secret police with deadly force.

    And with Venezuela for nationalizing the oil industry.
  • MustaphaMondeoMustaphaMondeo Posts: 453
    edited 1:23PM
    Starry said:

    HYUFD said:

    If I were Kemi I’d be very relaxed about Zahawi going.

    The more the discredited old guard go, the easier it becomes to move forwards with a new proposition.

    Kemi this morning, 'Oh dear, I have lost Zahawi, Nadine Dorries, Gullis, Kruger, Berry, Andrea Jenkyns. Who next will follow them to Reform? Liz Truss? I will keep the champagne on ice!'
    I’m rather surprised La Truss hasn’t moved over yet. The only reason I can think she hasn’t is that:

    (a) she really wants a big press conference with Farage, and he knows that he literally can’t be pictured anywhere near her and retain credibility so he’s telling her where to go; or

    (b) she thinks she can time it for maximum “impact” (eg after the local elections).

    What poor Liz probably doesn’t get is that any announcement of which party she’s in will immediately lob a hand grenade at that party’s fortunes. Champagne corks would be popping at Tory HQ if she went to Reform.
    I suspect Reform have probably told her not to join until after a GE. I do think these ex-Tory MPs will impact Reform when there's much more scrutiny in the run-up to a general election. There's plenty of ammunition to counter 'none of the above' if the ones on Question Time are career politicians and former chairs of the Tory Party with a track record of denouncing Reform.
    Liz Truss PM?

    While I’m not particularly politically aligned, I’d love FPTP to leave us there. Again. I’d be laughing like a drain for at least a week.

    Edit. We may laugh but when it comes to high office, Truss has done it.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 57,302
    Nigelb said:

    More socialism on the cards...

    U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright says the U.S. taking ownership stakes in oil companies is a real possibility, signaling a major shift in energy and national security strategy.
    https://x.com/zywiremedia1/status/2010387313931813070

    Typical government inefficiency. If the oil companies just issued shares to DJT they would get on a lot better.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 26,409

    As far as I know, Zahawi was the only person to have an active HMRC investigation against him while he was Chancellor. Typical Johnson-era maladministrator.

    Reform really are the party for spivs, nuts and crooks.

    Your Party too.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 40,295

    Starry said:

    HYUFD said:

    If I were Kemi I’d be very relaxed about Zahawi going.

    The more the discredited old guard go, the easier it becomes to move forwards with a new proposition.

    Kemi this morning, 'Oh dear, I have lost Zahawi, Nadine Dorries, Gullis, Kruger, Berry, Andrea Jenkyns. Who next will follow them to Reform? Liz Truss? I will keep the champagne on ice!'
    I’m rather surprised La Truss hasn’t moved over yet. The only reason I can think she hasn’t is that:

    (a) she really wants a big press conference with Farage, and he knows that he literally can’t be pictured anywhere near her and retain credibility so he’s telling her where to go; or

    (b) she thinks she can time it for maximum “impact” (eg after the local elections).

    What poor Liz probably doesn’t get is that any announcement of which party she’s in will immediately lob a hand grenade at that party’s fortunes. Champagne corks would be popping at Tory HQ if she went to Reform.
    I suspect Reform have probably told her not to join until after a GE. I do think these ex-Tory MPs will impact Reform when there's much more scrutiny in the run-up to a general election. There's plenty of ammunition to counter 'none of the above' if the ones on Question Time are career politicians and former chairs of the Tory Party with a track record of denouncing Reform.
    Liz Truss PM?

    While I’m not particularly politically aligned, I’d love FPTP to leave us there. Again. I’d be laughing like a drain for at least a week.

    Edit. We may laugh but when it comes to high office, Truss has done it.
    “People used to laugh when I told them I’d become Prime Minister. Well, they aren’t laughing now!”
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 14,645

    HYUFD said:

    'Best Prime Minister Polling:

    Starmer Vs Farage:
    🌹 Starmer: 36% (+1)
    ➡️ Farage: 29% (+1)

    Starmer Vs Badenoch:
    🌹Starmer: 28% (-2)
    🌳 Badenoch: 28% (+8)

    Farage Vs Badenoch:
    🌳 Badenoch: 31% (+10)
    ➡️ Farage: 21% (-2)

    Via
    @YouGov
    , 6-7 Jan.
    Changes w/ 3-4 Aug.'
    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/2010674640532746643?s=20

    Good morning

    Excellent progress for Kemi especially in regard to Farage

    May she continue her progress
    It is suggesting in those numbers, those who tell pollsters they will vote Reform, actually prefer Kemi as PM, that’s important if “party support” in mid term is protest vote and preferred PM more indicative of what happens in May 29.

    However ultimately we have to confess, Kemi’s Achilles Heel right now, unless it can be mitigated, is, as far as she has one, the party’s policy platform. “Cavemen done just fine without a welfare state” for example.

    A Conservative Rise at expense of Reform may move everything towards a 1983 result, a split tribe cancels itself out allowing “majority unliked” government a landslide.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 22,934
    Has anyone asked Kemi lately whether it is still Tory policy for a “UK ICE”?

    She’s a lightweight.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 16,572
    edited 1:44PM

    Cookie said:

    Off thread - I saw this on facebook the other day. It's actually quite a good shorthand for 'what does the electorate think about the rest of the world'.


    Full detail and background here: https://brilliantmaps.com/positive-opinions-uk/?fbclid=IwY2xjawPRvq1leHRuA2FlbQIxMABzcnRjBmFwcF9pZBAyMjIwMzkxNzg4MjAwODkyAAEeg7_zc_JD8Fa0IKqcSdmDUJgE6DMha0roODZ8AbKZfcHgC6pkdnL5ubhkhAA_aem_Ow7KFARYWADhrWc16eezmA

    In short, we like New Zealand, Canada and Australia, and also Scandinavia, and also Spain.

    @Gardenwalker may be interested given his recent article and his antecedents.

    The US number is a sad reflection on how Trump has tarnished his country's reputation. It is viewed less favourably than Mexico and its score is notably weak when compared to other Anglophone countries. The other interesting number is Japan, that is a country that Brits seem to have warmed to significantly over my lifetime.
    Except this is, I think, Q4 2024 data - so possibly after the election but before all the things Trump has done in his first year as president. My guess is that it has fallen further since.

    I have no evidence for this, but I suspect your point stands: had this survey been done in 2015, my guess is that the USA would have ranked higher than France.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 22,934
    Gold is up a few percentage points as traders weigh the latest attack on the independence of the U.S. Fed.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 21,775
    edited 1:47PM

    HYUFD said:

    'Best Prime Minister Polling:

    Starmer Vs Farage:
    🌹 Starmer: 36% (+1)
    ➡️ Farage: 29% (+1)

    Starmer Vs Badenoch:
    🌹Starmer: 28% (-2)
    🌳 Badenoch: 28% (+8)

    Farage Vs Badenoch:
    🌳 Badenoch: 31% (+10)
    ➡️ Farage: 21% (-2)

    Via
    @YouGov
    , 6-7 Jan.
    Changes w/ 3-4 Aug.'
    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/2010674640532746643?s=20

    Good morning

    Excellent progress for Kemi especially in regard to Farage

    May she continue her progress
    Is being rated as no better than Starmer who we are told is the most unpopular PM since polling began 'excellent'? Well chaque un a son gout......but reading the tea leaves I'd say the clear winner today is Starmer.

    Zahawi in one action makes the Tories look irrelevant and Reform look undesirable.
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 8,535
    edited 1:47PM

    HYUFD said:

    'Best Prime Minister Polling:

    Starmer Vs Farage:
    🌹 Starmer: 36% (+1)
    ➡️ Farage: 29% (+1)

    Starmer Vs Badenoch:
    🌹Starmer: 28% (-2)
    🌳 Badenoch: 28% (+8)

    Farage Vs Badenoch:
    🌳 Badenoch: 31% (+10)
    ➡️ Farage: 21% (-2)

    Via
    @YouGov
    , 6-7 Jan.
    Changes w/ 3-4 Aug.'
    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/2010674640532746643?s=20

    Good morning

    Excellent progress for Kemi especially in regard to Farage

    May she continue her progress
    It is suggesting in those numbers, those who tell pollsters they will vote Reform, actually prefer Kemi as PM, that’s important if “party support” in mid term is protest vote and preferred PM more indicative of what happens in May 29.

    However ultimately we have to confess, Kemi’s Achilles Heel right now, unless it can be mitigated, is, as far as she has one, the party’s policy platform. “Cavemen done just fine without a welfare state” for example.

    A Conservative Rise at expense of Reform may move everything towards a 1983 result, a split tribe cancels itself out allowing “majority unliked” government a landslide.
    Predicting the next GE becomes even more uncertain.

    I think a window is plausibly opening for the Badenoch Tories to essentially present themselves as the radical small-state, deregulating, low tax, free enterprise brooms. If they can sound plausible on immigration and asylum matters too, then they essentially inhabit a decent ground on the political spectrum to win back traditional centre-right voters, some of the professional classes and those for whom a Reform vote is possible but who cannot bring themselves to vote for Farage when the crunch point comes.

    Now that coalition in and of itself probably wouldn’t win them more than 35% of the electorate absolute tops, but that would be more than enough to keep them relevant and on current fragmentation could even win them an election (no laughing at the back).

    This is admittedly an overly-optimistic scenario but losing some of the old guard to Reform likely helps them in this situation. The two main problems they have are (a) infighting and leadership - if they’re going to go in on this, they have to look credible and to look credible they are going to have to stick with Badenoch as leader - anything else undermines the narrative of stability etc (b) any sensible reform of benefits in this country requires a discussion around the triple lock and the oldies are one part of their voter coalition they will find it hard to lose.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 18,062
    MelonB said:

    HYUFD said:

    algarkirk said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    Thanks for this, Ben, and "Ho, hum" for my predictions.

    Does anyone get the impression that there seemed to be very little reviewing of 2025 both on PB and across the wider media? If ever a year slipped into history unloved and unmarked, 2025 was it, and perhaps it is a wider malaise than simply Starmer or Trump or any one of the news stories this year.

    And yet, and this is true for most years, and is an important corollary to the go and vote / politics is vital brigade: how often does politics directly turn the course of somebody's life on here? Despite Trump, despite Labour, despite war and refugees and all, most years and last year, the effects of politics on my life were very much at the margins and I think most people can say the same. So, however mad it gets out there, remember it remains a niche and peripheral interest.

    Perhaps politics will come for me this year, and perhaps it is naive to be complacent about it, but more likely "They'll burn down the synagogues at 6 o'clock, and we'll all carry on like before".

    A perceptive post. I do sometimes wonder if it makes a blind bit of difference to my life which party / politicians are elected but on the macro scale I fear it does - the world feels much less safe with Trump in the White House.
    Indeed. To echo TSE’s comments, I think a US invasion of Greenland would have a huge impact on all of us in the UK.
    73% of Americans oppose invading Greenland, just 8% in favour, even a majority of Republican voters are opposed. It is not happening.

    A purchase offer is more likely but still only 28% in favour

    https://www.stripes.com/theaters/europe/2026-01-08/greenland-military-poll-20339489.html
    Like a lot of things in the American democracy/opposition to Trump category, the views of the American public only matter if they matter.

    Is there any sign at all that they do? In the Good Place, "congressmen and senators want to be re-elected" is a good answer, but it's not obvious that we are in the Good Place.
    73% opposition is enough to ensure even Congress impeaches and convicts Trump if he invaded Greenland (which he won't). The fact less than half of even Republican voters back such an invasion means most Republican Senators would vote to convict Trump rather than face losing their seats in that eventuality, which is again why Trump won't.

    He will try and buy Greenland which over half of Republicans at least back but that is it
    This argument is predicated on there being a continuing future of free and fair elections in the USA. I don't think we can begin assessing that until after the November election time.

    No, given almost half of Republican Senators and a few GOP House Reps have joined all the Democrats to tell Trump not to invade Greenland he would be impeached if he did so by the House and likely convicted by the required 2/3 margin in the Senate even now if he invaded Greenland.

    If Democrats as polls predict take the House in November they will almost certainly impeach again Trump even if he doesn't invade Greenland.

    As I said, US midterms are run by State governments NOT the Federal government
    Personally I think Trump SOP is to suggest an ultra-extreme policy opyion in order to reduce opposition to a slightly less extreme one. I can't see a US invasion of Greenald, but a buy-out or similar might well be offered. It's an interesting question how open voters are to buyouts. {Patriotism per se is unfashionable, and most countries have unpopular governments and oppositions specialising in cashing in on Government unpopularity. Is there a price that Greenlanders (who aren't thrilled by Danish support, but at present even less thrilled by becoming American) wou,d accept? $100K doesn't seem enough, but $1 billionK per head? Come to that, would British voters resist any offer?
    I expect the break-even would be around $1m per head. So that’s 50-60bn for the US to spend.

    I was wondering, is there any precedent for a country to bribe inhabitants of another country to sell their sovereignty? Not the rulers (as the US effectively did multiple times at both local and state level) but the inhabitants?

    The political issue in the 50 states would not necessarily be the total cost, though that’s still material, but the fairness point. “Why are those lazy workshy Greenlanders sitting in clover on the expense account of Uncle Sam while I, a patriotic hard working American, struggle to pay the grocery bills each week?”
    I just don't see Trump as being into this solution. He likes to be seen to be getting a good deal. He's not the sort who likes to be seen handing out $1m to (not yet) non-Americans.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 22,934
    edited 1:49PM
    NZ was the first country to make interest rate setting independent, in the mid-80s.

    A 2% inflation target was set, literally because it sounded about right.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,482
    edited 1:52PM

    NZ was the first country to make interest rate setting independent, in the mid-80s.

    A 2% inflation target was set, literally because it sounded about right.

    Well deflation, say of -20% YoY is a bad thing; as is very high inflation. We know these as truisms.

    But you're right, what makes 2% particularly special ?

    If it's harming the economy to not let it run at say 3% should measures actively be put in place to keep it at 2. Or should it be passu with the 30 yr gilt rate of a nation so neither borrowing or lending is punished in real terms.

    Good point !
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 59,883
    DavidL said:

    Nigelb said:

    More socialism on the cards...

    U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright says the U.S. taking ownership stakes in oil companies is a real possibility, signaling a major shift in energy and national security strategy.
    https://x.com/zywiremedia1/status/2010387313931813070

    Typical government inefficiency. If the oil companies just issued shares to DJT they would get on a lot better.
    The curious thing is that a number of the things that Trump is doing are insane, corrupt versions of what sane people would do.

    For example, round the world, many countries with oil have some kind of golden share setup (at least) with the national oil companies. If not an outright state oil company.

    The crackdown on share buybacks is something that many observers have advocated - if Boeing had invested about 20% of the money it spent n share buy backs, it would have been able to develop 2-3 totally new aircraft. No 737 MAX. Aerospace inflation in the traditional prime defence contractors is out of control - see the price for the new US ICBM.

    Etc etc...
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 18,062
    theProle said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Ofcom investigating the exploitative porn generator formerly known as Twitter

    And ignoring that Gemini and Meta's AI (IIRC) turned out to do the same, just no one has made a equivalent fuss in the media? We're less different to Trump's America than we'd like to believe.

    Also, this whole circus is about trying to ram a genie back into a bottle into which it's not going to go. They'll be "Pornification" apps running locally on people's phones inside a couple of years, Online Safety Act or not. I don't like the shape of the future very much, but it's coming, like it or not - Ofcom are merely a more leadfooted King Canute, not so much standing on the beach telling the tide not to come further up as wading into the sea at low water and commanding it to go further away.

    On the (minor) plus side, it will make all the problems with stolen/illicitly shared nudes much smaller, as everyone will plausibly be able to claim any given image or video of then is a fake,whether it is or not.
    The problem will be bigger than Twitter, but that's no reason to let Twitter get away with profiting from the problem and ignoring the concerns of national governments.
  • isamisam Posts: 43,335
    Roger said:

    HYUFD said:

    'Best Prime Minister Polling:

    Starmer Vs Farage:
    🌹 Starmer: 36% (+1)
    ➡️ Farage: 29% (+1)

    Starmer Vs Badenoch:
    🌹Starmer: 28% (-2)
    🌳 Badenoch: 28% (+8)

    Farage Vs Badenoch:
    🌳 Badenoch: 31% (+10)
    ➡️ Farage: 21% (-2)

    Via
    @YouGov
    , 6-7 Jan.
    Changes w/ 3-4 Aug.'
    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/2010674640532746643?s=20

    Good morning

    Excellent progress for Kemi especially in regard to Farage

    May she continue her progress
    Is being rated as no better than Starmer who we are told is the most unpopular PM since polling began 'excellent'? Well chaque un a son gout......but reading the tea leaves I'd say the clear winner today is Starmer.

    Zahawi in one action makes the Tories look irrelevant and Reform look undesirable.
    You can only beat what is in front of you, and Badenoch is winning against all her opponents, if you consider the results vs other leaders a tie breaker, as she is level with the incumbency boosted PM

    She really has upped her game over the last six months. I agree with people who say Zahawi isn’t a big loss. Reform taking Conservatives who were a major part of the last debacle probably does her a favour. They should really go for a youthful image, and attract young voters. Be tough on the triple lock, two child cap and spend the savings on opportunities for the under thirties
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 18,062
    maxh said:

    FF43 said:

    MelonB said:

    HYUFD said:

    algarkirk said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    Thanks for this, Ben, and "Ho, hum" for my predictions.

    Does anyone get the impression that there seemed to be very little reviewing of 2025 both on PB and across the wider media? If ever a year slipped into history unloved and unmarked, 2025 was it, and perhaps it is a wider malaise than simply Starmer or Trump or any one of the news stories this year.

    And yet, and this is true for most years, and is an important corollary to the go and vote / politics is vital brigade: how often does politics directly turn the course of somebody's life on here? Despite Trump, despite Labour, despite war and refugees and all, most years and last year, the effects of politics on my life were very much at the margins and I think most people can say the same. So, however mad it gets out there, remember it remains a niche and peripheral interest.

    Perhaps politics will come for me this year, and perhaps it is naive to be complacent about it, but more likely "They'll burn down the synagogues at 6 o'clock, and we'll all carry on like before".

    A perceptive post. I do sometimes wonder if it makes a blind bit of difference to my life which party / politicians are elected but on the macro scale I fear it does - the world feels much less safe with Trump in the White House.
    Indeed. To echo TSE’s comments, I think a US invasion of Greenland would have a huge impact on all of us in the UK.
    73% of Americans oppose invading Greenland, just 8% in favour, even a majority of Republican voters are opposed. It is not happening.

    A purchase offer is more likely but still only 28% in favour

    https://www.stripes.com/theaters/europe/2026-01-08/greenland-military-poll-20339489.html
    Like a lot of things in the American democracy/opposition to Trump category, the views of the American public only matter if they matter.

    Is there any sign at all that they do? In the Good Place, "congressmen and senators want to be re-elected" is a good answer, but it's not obvious that we are in the Good Place.
    73% opposition is enough to ensure even Congress impeaches and convicts Trump if he invaded Greenland (which he won't). The fact less than half of even Republican voters back such an invasion means most Republican Senators would vote to convict Trump rather than face losing their seats in that eventuality, which is again why Trump won't.

    He will try and buy Greenland which over half of Republicans at least back but that is it
    This argument is predicated on there being a continuing future of free and fair elections in the USA. I don't think we can begin assessing that until after the November election time.

    No, given almost half of Republican Senators and a few GOP House Reps have joined all the Democrats to tell Trump not to invade Greenland he would be impeached if he did so by the House and likely convicted by the required 2/3 margin in the Senate even now if he invaded Greenland.

    If Democrats as polls predict take the House in November they will almost certainly impeach again Trump even if he doesn't invade Greenland.

    As I said, US midterms are run by State governments NOT the Federal government
    Personally I think Trump SOP is to suggest an ultra-extreme policy opyion in order to reduce opposition to a slightly less extreme one. I can't see a US invasion of Greenald, but a buy-out or similar might well be offered. It's an interesting question how open voters are to buyouts. {Patriotism per se is unfashionable, and most countries have unpopular governments and oppositions specialising in cashing in on Government unpopularity. Is there a price that Greenlanders (who aren't thrilled by Danish support, but at present even less thrilled by becoming American) wou,d accept? $100K doesn't seem enough, but $1 billionK per head? Come to that, would British voters resist any offer?
    I expect the break-even would be around $1m per head. So that’s 50-60bn for the US to spend.

    I was wondering, is there any precedent for a country to bribe inhabitants of another country to sell their sovereignty? Not the rulers (as the US effectively did multiple times at both local and state level) but the inhabitants?

    The political issue in the 50 states would not necessarily be the total cost, though that’s still material, but the fairness point. “Why are those lazy workshy Greenlanders sitting in clover on the expense account of Uncle Sam while I, a patriotic hard working American, struggle to pay the grocery bills each week?”
    Denmark provides about $700 million subsidy a year; the EU around $100 million on top. So I guess 30 years subsidy as a lump sum comes to a $24 billion figure, if you don't care USA or Denmark. Any hostile takeover needs a premium, so your numbers look right. Although we are not including a who-in their-right-mind-would-trust-a-Trump-contract premium.

    The US could on the other hand save their money and still get all the bases they want
    I would only accept a payoff for accepting US sovereignty if I could take the money and emigrate immediately.

    No amount of money would reconcile me to living under the jurisdiction of Trump's FBI and ICE.
    Is that really true? I'd like to think I'd say the same but, faced with the freedom for me and my family that £1m would offer, I'd find it hard to say no.

    Though my kids would still have to grow up in the society around us so maybe I'd resist.

    ETA big thanks for the competition Ben - I'm pleasantly surprised I wasn't last.
    The offer was $1m, which is only £741,756, which would be a lovely amount of money to receive, but does it guarantee freedom these days?
  • TazTaz Posts: 23,905

    DavidL said:

    Nigelb said:

    More socialism on the cards...

    U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright says the U.S. taking ownership stakes in oil companies is a real possibility, signaling a major shift in energy and national security strategy.
    https://x.com/zywiremedia1/status/2010387313931813070

    Typical government inefficiency. If the oil companies just issued shares to DJT they would get on a lot better.
    The curious thing is that a number of the things that Trump is doing are insane, corrupt versions of what sane people would do.

    For example, round the world, many countries with oil have some kind of golden share setup (at least) with the national oil companies. If not an outright state oil company.

    The crackdown on share buybacks is something that many observers have advocated - if Boeing had invested about 20% of the money it spent n share buy backs, it would have been able to develop 2-3 totally new aircraft. No 737 MAX. Aerospace inflation in the traditional prime defence contractors is out of control - see the price for the new US ICBM.

    Etc etc...
    Banning share buy backs for ftse100 companies was Lib Dem policy at the last election.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 18,062

    FF43 said:

    eek said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sandpit said:

    Congratulations to @Driver on the win, and to @Benpointer for organising.

    Sets reminder to self, to remember to enter the competition this year!

    We're just finalising the questions.

    We've got some proper elections to predict in 2026.
    There were national elections in Germany, Canada and Australia last year.

    This year the only major national elections are the US midterms and the New Zealand election
    Q1. Will the 2026 US midterms be free and fair? A1 Yes 0 :No 10 points.
    They probably will overall, it is state governments that run them not the Federal government anyway
    US elections are never that fair, because gerrymandering is so embedded.

    Has anyone done a list of who controls the process in the competitive districts? It shouldn't matter, but unfortunately it might.
    I’m always shocked at the amount of political micromanaging that goes on around US elections, with town mayors deciding things such as the location and opening hours of ballot boxes.

    Which of course they engineer to make sure their opponents’ voters face long queues, it’s all quite nakedly partisan.

    The US House is now so Gerrymandered that only a couple of dozen seats change hands, even when there’s a relatively large swing in the vote.

    Even attempts to tighten up rules such as voter ID, are fought along party lines.
    Downside of the "direct electoral accountability for everything" model that the USA tends towards.

    Some things are better done by technocrats working to explicit and democratically-agreed mandates.
    Yes, for all that we critisise politics the UK is actually very good at organising elections themselves.

    We generally wake up in the morning after a general election, with a pretty good idea of what’s happening. Only 2010 comes to mind as being up in the air for a few days, at least since the ‘70s.
    I don't think Ireland, with a fully proportional system takes much longer, does it?
    Generally speaking Ireland takes two days to get most of the count completed, though everyone has a pretty good idea of the overall result by the first lunchtime because the party workers observing the count (called tallymen) come up with very accurate tallies much more quickly. This is probably why they don't simply double/triple the number of counters in order to get the count completed in one day.

    It took quite a long time after the last election to finalise the coalition deal, nearly two months. I think in the end they only felt the need to get it done so that a government was in place before Trump was inaugurated.

    Ireland's system is STV, which is slower to count than a simple, directly proportional system, would be.
    STV is a shite system. The number of seats a party wins in a constituency is influenced by how many candidates they field.

    No such nonsense with D'Hondt. The gold standard system for multi-member constituencies.
    More correctly the number of seats a party wins is influenced by how the voters react to the number of candidates the party fields, and the qualities of those candidates.

    No other electoral system gives the voters as much power to select the party affiliation and individual qualities of the politician they wish to represent them.

    Short of banning political parties I can't think of an electoral system that more effectively minimises the power of political parties. Whereas party list PR puts the party bureaucracy even more in control than with FPTP.
    The 2 downsides of STV are the time it takes to count and the fact parties can game the system by just standing the number of candidates they expect to win as candidates.

    Which means that a political party who does unexpectedly well (say Sinn Fein in the last set of Irish elections) end up winning only the seats they've put candidates up for when they could have won another 10-20 seats.

    I don't think time taken to count the vote is a downside if it leads to a more representative/better result.

    It is true you optimally want to stand the number of candidates that you might win on a good day, but not more than that. I would count that as an undesirable quirk of the STV method - ideally you wouldn't be penalised for providing more candidates - but no-one's gaming the system. Everyone understands the calculation. In general you want to stand as many candidates as you might win. Sinn Fein miscalculated. It was their fault.
    So you agree that the number of SF members elected was not a true reflection of the level of support for SF under this so-called "proportional" system?
    SF thought they could game the system and were proved wrong. That seems like SF's problem. Excess SF votes under STV will have gone to SF-like alternate candidates of those voters' choice.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 41,521
    Vote @KemiBadenoch for 2029 Conservatives

    Vote @Nigel_Farage for 2022 Conservatives
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 10,341
    edited 2:13PM

    Has anyone asked Kemi lately whether it is still Tory policy for a “UK ICE”?

    She’s a lightweight.

    I'd say she was naive in thinking Trump 2 would prove benign. As for being lightweight, who exactly are the current heavyweights?

    Another story that seems quite incredible if true, a Jewish MP refused permission to visit a school on their constituency?

    https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/jewish-mp-visit-school-cancelled-5HjdQbW_2/
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 27,266
    Scott_xP said:

    @PippaCrerar

    ❤️‍🔥Tory sources confirm that Nadhim Zahawi made approaches to senior members of Kemi Badenoch's team about getting a peerage just weeks before defecting to Reform UK - but was turned down.

    Tory source: "Nadhim asked for a peerage several times. Given he was sacked for his dodgy tax affairs, this was never going to happen. His defection tells you everything you need to know about Reform being a repository for disgraced politicians."

    https://x.com/PippaCrerar/status/2010714449749877149?s=20

    Parties suppress bad things about their politicians whilst they remain onside, but the minute they defect it all comes tumbling out.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 21,202
    Scott_xP said:

    @PippaCrerar

    ❤️‍🔥Tory sources confirm that Nadhim Zahawi made approaches to senior members of Kemi Badenoch's team about getting a peerage just weeks before defecting to Reform UK - but was turned down.

    Tory source: "Nadhim asked for a peerage several times. Given he was sacked for his dodgy tax affairs, this was never going to happen. His defection tells you everything you need to know about Reform being a repository for disgraced politicians."

    https://x.com/PippaCrerar/status/2010714449749877149?s=20

    Captain Renault applies.
  • FossFoss Posts: 2,229
    HYUFD said:

    'Best Prime Minister Polling:

    Starmer Vs Farage:
    🌹 Starmer: 36% (+1)
    ➡️ Farage: 29% (+1)

    Starmer Vs Badenoch:
    🌹Starmer: 28% (-2)
    🌳 Badenoch: 28% (+8)

    Farage Vs Badenoch:
    🌳 Badenoch: 31% (+10)
    ➡️ Farage: 21% (-2)

    Via
    @YouGov
    , 6-7 Jan.
    Changes w/ 3-4 Aug.'
    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/2010674640532746643?s=20

    The rest of that polling is here. The important ones missing are probably the Davey/Starmer and Badenoch/Davey crossovers.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 14,645

    HYUFD said:

    'Best Prime Minister Polling:

    Starmer Vs Farage:
    🌹 Starmer: 36% (+1)
    ➡️ Farage: 29% (+1)

    Starmer Vs Badenoch:
    🌹Starmer: 28% (-2)
    🌳 Badenoch: 28% (+8)

    Farage Vs Badenoch:
    🌳 Badenoch: 31% (+10)
    ➡️ Farage: 21% (-2)

    Via
    @YouGov
    , 6-7 Jan.
    Changes w/ 3-4 Aug.'
    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/2010674640532746643?s=20

    Good morning

    Excellent progress for Kemi especially in regard to Farage

    May she continue her progress
    It is suggesting in those numbers, those who tell pollsters they will vote Reform, actually prefer Kemi as PM, that’s important if “party support” in mid term is protest vote and preferred PM more indicative of what happens in May 29.

    However ultimately we have to confess, Kemi’s Achilles Heel right now, unless it can be mitigated, is, as far as she has one, the party’s policy platform. “Cavemen done just fine without a welfare state” for example.

    A Conservative Rise at expense of Reform may move everything towards a 1983 result, a split tribe cancels itself out allowing “majority unliked” government a landslide.
    Predicting the next GE becomes even more uncertain.

    I think a window is plausibly opening for the Badenoch Tories to essentially present themselves as the radical small-state, deregulating, low tax, free enterprise brooms. If they can sound plausible on immigration and asylum matters too, then they essentially inhabit a decent ground on the political spectrum to win back traditional centre-right voters, some of the professional classes and those for whom a Reform vote is possible but who cannot bring themselves to vote for Farage when the crunch point comes.

    Now that coalition in and of itself probably wouldn’t win them more than 35% of the electorate absolute tops, but that would be more than enough to keep them relevant and on current fragmentation could even win them an election (no laughing at the back).

    This is admittedly an overly-optimistic scenario but losing some of the old guard to Reform likely helps them in this situation. The two main problems they have are (a) infighting and leadership - if they’re going to go in on this, they have to look credible and to look credible they are going to have to stick with Badenoch as leader - anything else undermines the narrative of stability etc (b) any sensible reform of benefits in this country requires a discussion around the triple lock and the oldies are one part of their voter coalition they will find it hard to lose.
    I know what you are saying, but there’s a reason for being reduced to just 120 MPs, how quickly will that be forgotten?

    Reform keep banging on about “Boris Wave” the Conservative Government record on immigration, securing the borders, and assimilation of migrants to UK values, whilst Labour keep banging on about the last Conservative governments records on NHS, public services, cost of living - it’s possible that improvements in coming years on those things the, sitting government gets credit for.

    To what extent does the May, Boris, Truss, Sunak government record still hurt the Conservatives not just in 2029, but the 2030’s elections too?

    In the bigger picture to this, psephological comparisons with today and the 2 party past, just cannot be made anymore imo - it’s two different things now so comparing can’t neatly read across - same with “worst satisfaction ratings ever” questions.

    However, correct me where wrong, what interests me is the current governments “true comparison” - and how, as explained above, lot of pebble counting stats don’t read across so leaves us with “psychological hunch’s” - with Lady Thatchers turbulent and unpopular first term.

    What saved the Conservatives in 1983 General Election was neatly split opposition votes, whilst what delivered a landslide win in 1987 was the improved economy, and concern the opposition would fuck it up. You can be in government through some turbulent and unpopular years, and then as a party get even better results.

    And where you say credibility in 2029 can only come from sticking with Kemi, credibility in 2029 would also be the policy platform Kemi is tied to - and if it’s not a popular policy platform across the electorate, is one reason she would be sent to Leadership Graveyard. But, if trying to get the best possible result up from 120 MPs is that a “best way to stop a PM Farage is Vote Conservative” message - that would need credibility in policy platform to back it up. Do Conservatives junk Kemi to junk her policies for others with broader appeal across all electorate, or junk Kemi in attempt to out battle Farage with Jenrick?
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 18,062

    DavidL said:

    Nigelb said:

    More socialism on the cards...

    U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright says the U.S. taking ownership stakes in oil companies is a real possibility, signaling a major shift in energy and national security strategy.
    https://x.com/zywiremedia1/status/2010387313931813070

    Typical government inefficiency. If the oil companies just issued shares to DJT they would get on a lot better.
    The curious thing is that a number of the things that Trump is doing are insane, corrupt versions of what sane people would do.

    For example, round the world, many countries with oil have some kind of golden share setup (at least) with the national oil companies. If not an outright state oil company.

    The crackdown on share buybacks is something that many observers have advocated - if Boeing had invested about 20% of the money it spent n share buy backs, it would have been able to develop 2-3 totally new aircraft. No 737 MAX. Aerospace inflation in the traditional prime defence contractors is out of control - see the price for the new US ICBM.

    Etc etc...
    Trump is currently doing multiple crazy illegal and undemocratic things. He used to do a few a month. He's now making multiple statements a day. There's a clear uptick. He appears to be losing it... where "it" is hit grasp of reality, but sadly not "control of the country".
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 59,186

    Fun Fact: A paper airplane can be in flight yet remain stationery.

    A full-sized glider can do the same, given a windy enough day. Been there, done that!
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 5,643
    Sandpit said:

    Fun Fact: A paper airplane can be in flight yet remain stationery.

    A full-sized glider can do the same, given a windy enough day. Been there, done that!
    Whoosh!
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 18,923
    Zahawi moving from the Tories indicates the rats think the Reform ship at this moment is a lot more seaworthy than the Conservative one. That's a helpful indicator for Reform and bad news for the Tories.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 22,934

    Has anyone asked Kemi lately whether it is still Tory policy for a “UK ICE”?

    She’s a lightweight.

    I'd say she was naive in thinking Trump 2 would prove benign. As for being lightweight, who exactly are the current heavyweights?

    Another story that seems quite incredible if true, a Jewish MP refused permission to visit a school on their constituency?

    https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/jewish-mp-visit-school-cancelled-5HjdQbW_2/
    Who the hell thought that Trump would be benign?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 62,854
    Taz said:

    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    Thanks for this, Ben, and "Ho, hum" for my predictions.

    Does anyone get the impression that there seemed to be very little reviewing of 2025 both on PB and across the wider media? If ever a year slipped into history unloved and unmarked, 2025 was it, and perhaps it is a wider malaise than simply Starmer or Trump or any one of the news stories this year.

    And yet, and this is true for most years, and is an important corollary to the go and vote / politics is vital brigade: how often does politics directly turn the course of somebody's life on here? Despite Trump, despite Labour, despite war and refugees and all, most years and last year, the effects of politics on my life were very much at the margins and I think most people can say the same. So, however mad it gets out there, remember it remains a niche and peripheral interest.

    Perhaps politics will come for me this year, and perhaps it is naive to be complacent about it, but more likely "They'll burn down the synagogues at 6 o'clock, and we'll all carry on like before".

    A really interesting post, for which many thanks.

    2024 was always going to be a hard act to follow for this site - having both a UK General Election and a US Presidential election in the same year is basically two trips to the buffet on the same day and it's fair to say many on here didn't like either result. A world with Sunak as Prime Minister and Harris as President would be a very different place, you'd imagine.

    As to the day-to-day impact of politics, what happens locally affects me more than what happens nationally in the short term (the longer term is different). We have in 2026 local elections here in London and that will have an impact even though I imagine barely a third of those who can vote will vote.

    We are all political or politics enthusiasts - we wouldn't be here otherwise. Sometimes, we like to see change before it manifests more broadly and spot trends before they become obvious -the betting part of the site plays to that.

    We all have our agendas, our teams and our flags and the debates/arguments reflect those. Too often we revisit old battles simply because we can but as the annual prediction contest shows, trying to read the runes of the future - well, I'd have more chance of going through the card at Lingfield this afternoon.
    A world with Sunak as PM still and Harris as US President would have been better for Ukraine, better for the UK economy and business owners, wealthy pensioners and property owners and farmers, better for woke in the US, worse for Putin and Netanyahu, worse for UK train drivers and GPs and those claiming lots of welfare and better for the global free market which would still be largely tariff free and better for tackling climate change. It would have been good for trans in the US, not so good for trans in the UK.

    It would also have been a better world for those who like slick and articulate leaders, which Sunak and Harris were clearly more than Starmer and Trump. Most of the white working class and lower middle class in both nations though clearly rejected Sunak and Harris for what they thought would be straightforward common sense with Starmer and Trump
    I’m not sure Harris would be better for the economy. Her plan to tax unrealised gains as wealth was stupid.

    The US economy is forecast to grow at 5.4% in the final quarter. Harris woilent achieve that.
    It is, however, worth noting that all the economic growth in America is investment in data centers, which is not generating employment.

    The consequence of this is that (a) job numbers are very weak, and (b) Americans are extremely negative about their personal finances.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 22,934

    DavidL said:

    Nigelb said:

    More socialism on the cards...

    U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright says the U.S. taking ownership stakes in oil companies is a real possibility, signaling a major shift in energy and national security strategy.
    https://x.com/zywiremedia1/status/2010387313931813070

    Typical government inefficiency. If the oil companies just issued shares to DJT they would get on a lot better.
    The curious thing is that a number of the things that Trump is doing are insane, corrupt versions of what sane people would do.

    For example, round the world, many countries with oil have some kind of golden share setup (at least) with the national oil companies. If not an outright state oil company.

    The crackdown on share buybacks is something that many observers have advocated - if Boeing had invested about 20% of the money it spent n share buy backs, it would have been able to develop 2-3 totally new aircraft. No 737 MAX. Aerospace inflation in the traditional prime defence contractors is out of control - see the price for the new US ICBM.

    Etc etc...
    Trump is currently doing multiple crazy illegal and undemocratic things. He used to do a few a month. He's now making multiple statements a day. There's a clear uptick. He appears to be losing it... where "it" is hit grasp of reality, but sadly not "control of the country".
    He’s gotta get ahead of the midterms.
    He’s an elderly (and sick) man in a hurry.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 24,177

    Fun Fact: A paper airplane can be in flight yet remain stationery.

    Aeroplane, ffs.
  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 3,412
    isam said:

    Roger said:

    HYUFD said:

    'Best Prime Minister Polling:

    Starmer Vs Farage:
    🌹 Starmer: 36% (+1)
    ➡️ Farage: 29% (+1)

    Starmer Vs Badenoch:
    🌹Starmer: 28% (-2)
    🌳 Badenoch: 28% (+8)

    Farage Vs Badenoch:
    🌳 Badenoch: 31% (+10)
    ➡️ Farage: 21% (-2)

    Via
    @YouGov
    , 6-7 Jan.
    Changes w/ 3-4 Aug.'
    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/2010674640532746643?s=20

    Good morning

    Excellent progress for Kemi especially in regard to Farage

    May she continue her progress
    Is being rated as no better than Starmer who we are told is the most unpopular PM since polling began 'excellent'? Well chaque un a son gout......but reading the tea leaves I'd say the clear winner today is Starmer.

    Zahawi in one action makes the Tories look irrelevant and Reform look undesirable.
    You can only beat what is in front of you, and Badenoch is winning against all her opponents, if you consider the results vs other leaders a tie breaker, as she is level with the incumbency boosted PM

    She really has upped her game over the last six months. I agree with people who say Zahawi isn’t a big loss. Reform taking Conservatives who were a major part of the last debacle probably does her a favour. They should really go for a youthful image, and attract young voters. Be tough on the triple lock, two child cap and spend the savings on opportunities for the under thirties
    My take on all this is that while Reform are definitely the chosen party of protest, and may well do just fine in May and in by-elections, the race remains very open for the actual general election in 2029.

    What the Tories (and Labour) must resist is panicking after the May results. Play it cool and let the media turn their heat on to Farage.

    On Zahawi, difficult to imagine, from a Tory POV, someone you would be more relaxed about losing. They'll hit the jackpot if Truss defects.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 14,645
    Foss said:

    HYUFD said:

    'Best Prime Minister Polling:

    Starmer Vs Farage:
    🌹 Starmer: 36% (+1)
    ➡️ Farage: 29% (+1)

    Starmer Vs Badenoch:
    🌹Starmer: 28% (-2)
    🌳 Badenoch: 28% (+8)

    Farage Vs Badenoch:
    🌳 Badenoch: 31% (+10)
    ➡️ Farage: 21% (-2)

    Via
    @YouGov
    , 6-7 Jan.
    Changes w/ 3-4 Aug.'
    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/2010674640532746643?s=20

    The rest of that polling is here. The important ones missing are probably the Davey/Starmer and Badenoch/Davey crossovers.
    And don’t knows/can’t be bothered with this right now.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 62,854
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    More socialism on the cards...

    U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright says the U.S. taking ownership stakes in oil companies is a real possibility, signaling a major shift in energy and national security strategy.
    https://x.com/zywiremedia1/status/2010387313931813070

    That'll larn 'em not to invest in Venezuela.

    Although the political risk of developing projects in the US is now highly elevated.
    The smart ones have found a loophole.

    U.S. President Donald J. Trump said on Sunday that he might block Exxon Mobil, the largest oil company in the United States, from investing in Venezuela after the company’s CEO called the country “uninvestable” during a White House meeting with oil executives last week, according to Reuters. “I didn't like Exxon's response,” Trump told reporters on Air Force One on his way back to Washington on Sunday. “I'll probably be inclined to keep Exxon out...
    https://x.com/sentdefender/status/2010534645700362646
    There's high fiving in the ExxonMobil board room.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 14,645
    edited 2:28PM

    HYUFD said:

    'Best Prime Minister Polling:

    Starmer Vs Farage:
    🌹 Starmer: 36% (+1)
    ➡️ Farage: 29% (+1)

    Starmer Vs Badenoch:
    🌹Starmer: 28% (-2)
    🌳 Badenoch: 28% (+8)

    Farage Vs Badenoch:
    🌳 Badenoch: 31% (+10)
    ➡️ Farage: 21% (-2)

    Via
    @YouGov
    , 6-7 Jan.
    Changes w/ 3-4 Aug.'
    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/2010674640532746643?s=20

    Good morning

    Excellent progress for Kemi especially in regard to Farage

    May she continue her progress
    It is suggesting in those numbers, those who tell pollsters they will vote Reform, actually prefer Kemi as PM, that’s important if “party support” in mid term is protest vote and preferred PM more indicative of what happens in May 29.

    However ultimately we have to confess, Kemi’s Achilles Heel right now, unless it can be mitigated, is, as far as she has one, the party’s policy platform. “Cavemen done just fine without a welfare state” for example.

    A Conservative Rise at expense of Reform may move everything towards a 1983 result, a split tribe cancels itself out allowing “majority unliked” government a landslide.
    Predicting the next GE becomes even more uncertain.

    I think a window is plausibly opening for the Badenoch Tories to essentially present themselves as the radical small-state, deregulating, low tax, free enterprise brooms. If they can sound plausible on immigration and asylum matters too, then they essentially inhabit a decent ground on the political spectrum to win back traditional centre-right voters, some of the professional classes and those for whom a Reform vote is possible but who cannot bring themselves to vote for Farage when the crunch point comes.

    Now that coalition in and of itself probably wouldn’t win them more than 35% of the electorate absolute tops, but that would be more than enough to keep them relevant and on current fragmentation could even win them an election (no laughing at the back).

    This is admittedly an overly-optimistic scenario but losing some of the old guard to Reform likely helps them in this situation. The two main problems they have are (a) infighting and leadership - if they’re going to go in on this, they have to look credible and to look credible they are going to have to stick with Badenoch as leader - anything else undermines the narrative of stability etc (b) any sensible reform of benefits in this country requires a discussion around the triple lock and the oldies are one part of their voter coalition they will find it hard to lose.
    I know what you are saying, but there’s a reason for being reduced to just 120 MPs, how quickly will that be forgotten?

    Reform keep banging on about “Boris Wave” the Conservative Government record on immigration, securing the borders, and assimilation of migrants to UK values, whilst Labour keep banging on about the last Conservative governments records on NHS, public services, cost of living - it’s possible that improvements in coming years on those things the, sitting government gets credit for.

    To what extent does the May, Boris, Truss, Sunak government record still hurt the Conservatives not just in 2029, but the 2030’s elections too?

    In the bigger picture to this, psephological comparisons with today and the 2 party past, just cannot be made anymore imo - it’s two different things now so comparing can’t neatly read across - same with “worst satisfaction ratings ever” questions.

    However, correct me where wrong, what interests me is the current governments “true comparison” - and how, as explained above, lot of pebble counting stats don’t read across so leaves us with “psychological hunch’s” - with Lady Thatchers turbulent and unpopular first term.

    What saved the Conservatives in 1983 General Election was neatly split opposition votes, whilst what delivered a landslide win in 1987 was the improved economy, and concern the opposition would fuck it up. You can be in government through some turbulent and unpopular years, and then as a party get even better results.

    And where you say credibility in 2029 can only come from sticking with Kemi, credibility in 2029 would also be the policy platform Kemi is tied to - and if it’s not a popular policy platform across the electorate, is one reason she would be sent to Leadership Graveyard. But, if trying to get the best possible result up from 120 MPs is that a “best way to stop a PM Farage is Vote Conservative” message - that would need credibility in policy platform to back it up. Do Conservatives junk Kemi to junk her policies for others with broader appeal across all electorate, or junk Kemi in attempt to out battle Farage with Jenrick?
    Do you see what I mean by how precarious Badenoch’s position is? The job simply boils down to put on MPs from historic low of 120 - that’s the only performance measurement really.

    Is “cavemen done fine without a welfare state” popular policy across the broader electorate come 2029, whilst option of going toe to toe with Farage on Reforms narrow messaging, to win voters back and put on 120+ MPs, is the slicker Jenrick the better option?
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 21,585

    Has anyone asked Kemi lately whether it is still Tory policy for a “UK ICE”?

    She’s a lightweight.

    I'd say she was naive in thinking Trump 2 would prove benign. As for being lightweight, who exactly are the current heavyweights?

    Another story that seems quite incredible if true, a Jewish MP refused permission to visit a school on their constituency?

    https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/jewish-mp-visit-school-cancelled-5HjdQbW_2/
    Who the hell thought that Trump would be benign?
    For my sins I thought it would be similar to the first Trump - lots of talk, not much happened.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 21,585

    Fun Fact: A paper airplane can be in flight yet remain stationery.

    Aeroplane, ffs.
    Yes, and they come into land at the aeroport, right?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 57,157
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    More socialism on the cards...

    U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright says the U.S. taking ownership stakes in oil companies is a real possibility, signaling a major shift in energy and national security strategy.
    https://x.com/zywiremedia1/status/2010387313931813070

    That'll larn 'em not to invest in Venezuela.

    Although the political risk of developing projects in the US is now highly elevated.
    The smart ones have found a loophole.

    U.S. President Donald J. Trump said on Sunday that he might block Exxon Mobil, the largest oil company in the United States, from investing in Venezuela after the company’s CEO called the country “uninvestable” during a White House meeting with oil executives last week, according to Reuters. “I didn't like Exxon's response,” Trump told reporters on Air Force One on his way back to Washington on Sunday. “I'll probably be inclined to keep Exxon out...
    https://x.com/sentdefender/status/2010534645700362646
    He really is Viz's Spoilt Bastard made flesh...
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 21,777

    Has anyone asked Kemi lately whether it is still Tory policy for a “UK ICE”?

    She’s a lightweight.

    Perhaps a UK ICE would be to the US ICE as the CofE is to religious fundamentalism in the rest of the world?

    A UK ICE agent might sit down with a suspected illegal immigrant found in Britain and talk sympathetically over their documentation and options with a cup of tea and a plate of biscuits.
  • glwglw Posts: 10,667

    Has anyone asked Kemi lately whether it is still Tory policy for a “UK ICE”?

    She’s a lightweight.

    I'd say she was naive in thinking Trump 2 would prove benign. As for being lightweight, who exactly are the current heavyweights?

    Another story that seems quite incredible if true, a Jewish MP refused permission to visit a school on their constituency?

    https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/jewish-mp-visit-school-cancelled-5HjdQbW_2/
    Who the hell thought that Trump would be benign?
    For my sins I thought it would be similar to the first Trump - lots of talk, not much happened.
    There were people in the government hiding papers, slow-walking decisions, and simply stalling in the hope that Trump would forget what he asked them to do. If not much happened it's because a lot of people in the previous administration and cabinet thwarted Trump, not because he wasn't trying to get stupid/illegal things done.
  • TazTaz Posts: 23,905

    Has anyone asked Kemi lately whether it is still Tory policy for a “UK ICE”?

    She’s a lightweight.

    I'd say she was naive in thinking Trump 2 would prove benign. As for being lightweight, who exactly are the current heavyweights?

    Another story that seems quite incredible if true, a Jewish MP refused permission to visit a school on their constituency?

    https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/jewish-mp-visit-school-cancelled-5HjdQbW_2/
    Who the hell thought that Trump would be benign?
    For my sins I thought it would be similar to the first Trump - lots of talk, not much happened.
    Same here.

    All piss and wind and nothing else.
  • TresTres Posts: 3,391
    Further evidence for the Badenoch isn't half as bright as she believes she is club.


    https://bsky.app/profile/jamesdaustin.bsky.social/post/3mc7l6legus2u
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 132,874

    Has anyone asked Kemi lately whether it is still Tory policy for a “UK ICE”?

    She’s a lightweight.

    Perhaps a UK ICE would be to the US ICE as the CofE is to religious fundamentalism in the rest of the world?

    A UK ICE agent might sit down with a suspected illegal immigrant found in Britain and talk sympathetically over their documentation and options with a cup of tea and a plate of biscuits.
    The C of E is a broad church, they are not all liberal Catholics, there are plenty of conservative evangelicals in the C of E who would certainly not welcome illegal immigrants with open arms
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 57,157

    Has anyone asked Kemi lately whether it is still Tory policy for a “UK ICE”?

    She’s a lightweight.

    Perhaps a UK ICE would be to the US ICE as the CofE is to religious fundamentalism in the rest of the world?

    A UK ICE agent might sit down with a suspected illegal immigrant found in Britain and talk sympathetically over their documentation and options with a cup of tea and a plate of biscuits.
    What would Jesus do?

    (Probably not pump three bullets into the back of their head...)
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 132,874
    edited 2:57PM
    FF43 said:

    Zahawi moving from the Tories indicates the rats think the Reform ship at this moment is a lot more seaworthy than the Conservative one. That's a helpful indicator for Reform and bad news for the Tories.

    No, more an indication of the aftermath of the 2022 Tory leadership and toppling of Boris still.

    Zahawi, like Berry served in Liz Truss' Cabinet and like Gullis, Holloway, Dorries, Jenkyn, Berry etc ultimately backed Truss over Sunak. Kruger backed Braverman not Sunak too. None of the current or ex Tory MPs who have defected to Reform backed Sunak in 2022.

    Most Truss backers backed Jenrick in the Tory leadership election in late 2024 too while most Sunak backers backed Badenoch in the final round (though many Sunak backers also supported Cleverly before he was knocked out in the last 3)
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 18,062

    Fun Fact: A paper airplane can be in flight yet remain stationery.

    Aeroplane, ffs.
    You can't make a plane out of a chocolate bar. That's silly.
  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 3,412
    FF43 said:

    Zahawi moving from the Tories indicates the rats think the Reform ship at this moment is a lot more seaworthy than the Conservative one. That's a helpful indicator for Reform and bad news for the Tories.

    Well, that depends on whether the "rats" have made the right judgement call. Not sure if would place the judgement of Nadine Dorries, Andrea Jenkyns, and Nadhim Zahawi particularly high.

    This judgement, issued by The Guardian in the wake of the Zahawi announcement, seems pretty sound:

    "Almost without exception, recruits from the Tories to Farage have all come from the more shifty, opportunist wing of the party (other adjectives are available)". You could add to that "self important" and "entitled".

  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 68,768
    edited 2:58PM
    FF43 said:

    Zahawi moving from the Tories indicates the rats think the Reform ship at this moment is a lot more seaworthy than the Conservative one. That's a helpful indicator for Reform and bad news for the Tories.

    I hope Truss joins Reform as well

    And on today's Yougov, not only has Badenoch caught Starmer as best PM, she has moved well ahead of Farage and even leads Davey

    She is being noticed and has greatly improved

    Sky is just reporting that Zahawi asked for a peerage but the conservatives turned him down, so maybe Farage will give him one
  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 3,412
    HYUFD said:

    FF43 said:

    Zahawi moving from the Tories indicates the rats think the Reform ship at this moment is a lot more seaworthy than the Conservative one. That's a helpful indicator for Reform and bad news for the Tories.

    No, more an indication of the aftermath of the 2022 Tory leadership and toppling of Boris still.

    Zahawi, like Berry served in Liz Truss' Cabinet and like Gullis, Holloway, Dorries, Jenkyn etc ultimately backed Truss over Sunak. Kruger backed Braverman not Sunak too. None of the current or ex Tory MPs who have defected to Reform backed Sunak in 2022.

    Most Truss backers backed Jenrick in the Tory leadership election in late 2024 too while most Sunak backers backed Badenoch in the final round (though many Sunak backers also supported Cleverly before he was knocked out in the last 3)
    It's an irony that the people who have most damaged the Tory party are now the vultures hoping to profit from its difficulties.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 36,365
    HYUFD said:

    FF43 said:

    Zahawi moving from the Tories indicates the rats think the Reform ship at this moment is a lot more seaworthy than the Conservative one. That's a helpful indicator for Reform and bad news for the Tories.

    No, more an indication of the aftermath of the 2022 Tory leadership and toppling of Boris still.

    Zahawi, like Berry served in Liz Truss' Cabinet and like Gullis, Jenkyn etc backed Truss over Sunak. Kruger backed Braverman not Sunak too.

    Most Truss backers backed Jenrick in the Tory leadership election in late 2024 too while most Sunak backers backed Badenoch in the final round (though many Sunak backers also supported Cleverly before he was knocked out in the last 3)
    TBF Kemi has repelled quite a lot of vile dross.

    Her party might even become electable again if she could jettison Patel, Braverman and Bob.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 36,365

    Fun Fact: A paper airplane can be in flight yet remain stationery.

    Aeroplane, ffs.
    You can't make a plane out of a chocolate bar. That's silly.
    Plain chocolate?
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 15,173
    Tres said:

    Further evidence for the Badenoch isn't half as bright as she believes she is club.


    https://bsky.app/profile/jamesdaustin.bsky.social/post/3mc7l6legus2u

    In fact she is right, although that map is singularly irrelevant. Blair noted in his memoirs that a tremendous amount of serious crime was committed by a few families and their networks. I suspect this is still true today, as is the lack of resolve to do anything about it.
  • MelonBMelonB Posts: 16,669
    Taz said:

    DavidL said:

    Nigelb said:

    More socialism on the cards...

    U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright says the U.S. taking ownership stakes in oil companies is a real possibility, signaling a major shift in energy and national security strategy.
    https://x.com/zywiremedia1/status/2010387313931813070

    Typical government inefficiency. If the oil companies just issued shares to DJT they would get on a lot better.
    The curious thing is that a number of the things that Trump is doing are insane, corrupt versions of what sane people would do.

    For example, round the world, many countries with oil have some kind of golden share setup (at least) with the national oil companies. If not an outright state oil company.

    The crackdown on share buybacks is something that many observers have advocated - if Boeing had invested about 20% of the money it spent n share buy backs, it would have been able to develop 2-3 totally new aircraft. No 737 MAX. Aerospace inflation in the traditional prime defence contractors is out of control - see the price for the new US ICBM.

    Etc etc...
    Banning share buy backs for ftse100 companies was Lib Dem policy at the last election.
    Fake news.

    The Lib Dem manifesto proposed a tax on share buybacks, something already in place in the USA and introduced by the Biden administration.

    I disagree with the policy - we don’t have the same distortions in the tax code that necessitated the US move - but of course they didn’t propose a ban.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 132,874

    HYUFD said:

    FF43 said:

    Zahawi moving from the Tories indicates the rats think the Reform ship at this moment is a lot more seaworthy than the Conservative one. That's a helpful indicator for Reform and bad news for the Tories.

    No, more an indication of the aftermath of the 2022 Tory leadership and toppling of Boris still.

    Zahawi, like Berry served in Liz Truss' Cabinet and like Gullis, Jenkyn etc backed Truss over Sunak. Kruger backed Braverman not Sunak too.

    Most Truss backers backed Jenrick in the Tory leadership election in late 2024 too while most Sunak backers backed Badenoch in the final round (though many Sunak backers also supported Cleverly before he was knocked out in the last 3)
    TBF Kemi has repelled quite a lot of vile dross.

    Her party might even become electable again if she could jettison Patel, Braverman and Bob.
    Maybe the first two but Jenrick is an effective opposition performer
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 8,535
    edited 3:08PM

    HYUFD said:

    'Best Prime Minister Polling:

    Starmer Vs Farage:
    🌹 Starmer: 36% (+1)
    ➡️ Farage: 29% (+1)

    Starmer Vs Badenoch:
    🌹Starmer: 28% (-2)
    🌳 Badenoch: 28% (+8)

    Farage Vs Badenoch:
    🌳 Badenoch: 31% (+10)
    ➡️ Farage: 21% (-2)

    Via
    @YouGov
    , 6-7 Jan.
    Changes w/ 3-4 Aug.'
    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/2010674640532746643?s=20

    Good morning

    Excellent progress for Kemi especially in regard to Farage

    May she continue her progress
    It is suggesting in those numbers, those who tell pollsters they will vote Reform, actually prefer Kemi as PM, that’s important if “party support” in mid term is protest vote and preferred PM more indicative of what happens in May 29.

    However ultimately we have to confess, Kemi’s Achilles Heel right now, unless it can be mitigated, is, as far as she has one, the party’s policy platform. “Cavemen done just fine without a welfare state” for example.

    A Conservative Rise at expense of Reform may move everything towards a 1983 result, a split tribe cancels itself out allowing “majority unliked” government a landslide.
    Predicting the next GE becomes even more uncertain.

    I think a window is plausibly opening for the Badenoch Tories to essentially present themselves as the radical small-state, deregulating, low tax, free enterprise brooms. If they can sound plausible on immigration and asylum matters too, then they essentially inhabit a decent ground on the political spectrum to win back traditional centre-right voters, some of the professional classes and those for whom a Reform vote is possible but who cannot bring themselves to vote for Farage when the crunch point comes.

    Now that coalition in and of itself probably wouldn’t win them more than 35% of the electorate absolute tops, but that would be more than enough to keep them relevant and on current fragmentation could even win them an election (no laughing at the back).

    This is admittedly an overly-optimistic scenario but losing some of the old guard to Reform likely helps them in this situation. The two main problems they have are (a) infighting and leadership - if they’re going to go in on this, they have to look credible and to look credible they are going to have to stick with Badenoch as leader - anything else undermines the narrative of stability etc (b) any sensible reform of benefits in this country requires a discussion around the triple lock and the oldies are one part of their voter coalition they will find it hard to lose.
    I know what you are saying, but there’s a reason for being reduced to just 120 MPs, how quickly will that be forgotten?

    Reform keep banging on about “Boris Wave” the Conservative Government record on immigration, securing the borders, and assimilation of migrants to UK values, whilst Labour keep banging on about the last Conservative governments records on NHS, public services, cost of living - it’s possible that improvements in coming years on those things the, sitting government gets credit for.

    To what extent does the May, Boris, Truss, Sunak government record still hurt the Conservatives not just in 2029, but the 2030’s elections too?

    In the bigger picture to this, psephological comparisons with today and the 2 party past, just cannot be made anymore imo - it’s two different things now so comparing can’t neatly read across - same with “worst satisfaction ratings ever” questions.

    However, correct me where wrong, what interests me is the current governments “true comparison” - and how, as explained above, lot of pebble counting stats don’t read across so leaves us with “psychological hunch’s” - with Lady Thatchers turbulent and unpopular first term.

    What saved the Conservatives in 1983 General Election was neatly split opposition votes, whilst what delivered a landslide win in 1987 was the improved economy, and concern the opposition would fuck it up. You can be in government through some turbulent and unpopular years, and then as a party get even better results.

    And where you say credibility in 2029 can only come from sticking with Kemi, credibility in 2029 would also be the policy platform Kemi is tied to - and if it’s not a popular policy platform across the electorate, is one reason she would be sent to Leadership Graveyard. But, if trying to get the best possible result up from 120 MPs is that a “best way to stop a PM Farage is Vote Conservative” message - that would need credibility in policy platform to back it up. Do Conservatives junk Kemi to junk her policies for others with broader appeal across all electorate, or junk Kemi in attempt to out battle Farage with Jenrick?
    Do you see what I mean by how precarious Badenoch’s position is? The job simply boils down to put on MPs from historic low of 120 - that’s the only performance measurement really.

    Is “cavemen done fine without a welfare state” popular policy across the broader electorate come 2029, whilst option of going toe to toe with Farage on Reforms narrow messaging, to win voters back and put on 120+ MPs, is the slicker Jenrick the better option?
    Do you mean is campaigning on welfare reform enough?

    No, of course it isn't. But the country is absolutely looking for someone to articulate an alternative, and there is an opening for a party to move to offer that alternative without resorting to the extremes of Reform or the Greens.

    Plausibly, the Tories can move into that ground. Badenoch isn't the finished article, but she was flailing hopelessly 12 months ago and has measurably improved. There are cautious signs that she has some understanding of some of the things that need to be fixed* - over-regulation, lack of dynamism, a rigid and complex tax system, an over-powerful process state and civil service bureaucracy, disincentives to investment and enterprise etc. Whether she can continue in that vein, the jury is still out. I have always thought she has potential - I'm not wholly convinced it's enough to turn her into a true leader, but we will see.

    *but as a counterpoint, so too does Starmer and Labour at times - they just don't seem to have any kind of plan to resolve them.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 34,662

    HYUFD said:

    'Best Prime Minister Polling:

    Starmer Vs Farage:
    🌹 Starmer: 36% (+1)
    ➡️ Farage: 29% (+1)

    Starmer Vs Badenoch:
    🌹Starmer: 28% (-2)
    🌳 Badenoch: 28% (+8)

    Farage Vs Badenoch:
    🌳 Badenoch: 31% (+10)
    ➡️ Farage: 21% (-2)

    Via
    @YouGov
    , 6-7 Jan.
    Changes w/ 3-4 Aug.'
    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/2010674640532746643?s=20

    Good morning

    Excellent progress for Kemi especially in regard to Farage

    May she continue her progress
    It is suggesting in those numbers, those who tell pollsters they will vote Reform, actually prefer Kemi as PM, that’s important if “party support” in mid term is protest vote and preferred PM more indicative of what happens in May 29.

    However ultimately we have to confess, Kemi’s Achilles Heel right now, unless it can be mitigated, is, as far as she has one, the party’s policy platform. “Cavemen done just fine without a welfare state” for example.

    A Conservative Rise at expense of Reform may move everything towards a 1983 result, a split tribe cancels itself out allowing “majority unliked” government a landslide.
    Predicting the next GE becomes even more uncertain.

    I think a window is plausibly opening for the Badenoch Tories to essentially present themselves as the radical small-state, deregulating, low tax, free enterprise brooms. If they can sound plausible on immigration and asylum matters too, then they essentially inhabit a decent ground on the political spectrum to win back traditional centre-right voters, some of the professional classes and those for whom a Reform vote is possible but who cannot bring themselves to vote for Farage when the crunch point comes.

    Now that coalition in and of itself probably wouldn’t win them more than 35% of the electorate absolute tops, but that would be more than enough to keep them relevant and on current fragmentation could even win them an election (no laughing at the back).

    This is admittedly an overly-optimistic scenario but losing some of the old guard to Reform likely helps them in this situation. The two main problems they have are (a) infighting and leadership - if they’re going to go in on this, they have to look credible and to look credible they are going to have to stick with Badenoch as leader - anything else undermines the narrative of stability etc (b) any sensible reform of benefits in this country requires a discussion around the triple lock and the oldies are one part of their voter coalition they will find it hard to lose.
    I know what you are saying, but there’s a reason for being reduced to just 120 MPs, how quickly will that be forgotten?

    Reform keep banging on about “Boris Wave” the Conservative Government record on immigration, securing the borders, and assimilation of migrants to UK values, whilst Labour keep banging on about the last Conservative governments records on NHS, public services, cost of living - it’s possible that improvements in coming years on those things the, sitting government gets credit for.

    To what extent does the May, Boris, Truss, Sunak government record still hurt the Conservatives not just in 2029, but the 2030’s elections too?

    In the bigger picture to this, psephological comparisons with today and the 2 party past, just cannot be made anymore imo - it’s two different things now so comparing can’t neatly read across - same with “worst satisfaction ratings ever” questions.

    However, correct me where wrong, what interests me is the current governments “true comparison” - and how, as explained above, lot of pebble counting stats don’t read across so leaves us with “psychological hunch’s” - with Lady Thatchers turbulent and unpopular first term.

    What saved the Conservatives in 1983 General Election was neatly split opposition votes, whilst what delivered a landslide win in 1987 was the improved economy, and concern the opposition would fuck it up. You can be in government through some turbulent and unpopular years, and then as a party get even better results.

    And where you say credibility in 2029 can only come from sticking with Kemi, credibility in 2029 would also be the policy platform Kemi is tied to - and if it’s not a popular policy platform across the electorate, is one reason she would be sent to Leadership Graveyard. But, if trying to get the best possible result up from 120 MPs is that a “best way to stop a PM Farage is Vote Conservative” message - that would need credibility in policy platform to back it up. Do Conservatives junk Kemi to junk her policies for others with broader appeal across all electorate, or junk Kemi in attempt to out battle Farage with Jenrick?
    Do you see what I mean by how precarious Badenoch’s position is? The job simply boils down to put on MPs from historic low of 120 - that’s the only performance measurement really.

    Is “cavemen done fine without a welfare state” popular policy across the broader electorate come 2029, whilst option of going toe to toe with Farage on Reforms narrow messaging, to win voters back and put on 120+ MPs, is the slicker Jenrick the better option?
    Jenrick imo is not slicker, and his attacks on the government walk into the same trap as Kemi's – things mostly started under Conservative governments. But where Jenrick might have an advantage is being more open to a pre-election deal with Nigel Farage to take it easy in each other's best seats.
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 15,173
    HYUFD said:

    FF43 said:

    Zahawi moving from the Tories indicates the rats think the Reform ship at this moment is a lot more seaworthy than the Conservative one. That's a helpful indicator for Reform and bad news for the Tories.

    No, more an indication of the aftermath of the 2022 Tory leadership and toppling of Boris still.

    Zahawi, like Berry served in Liz Truss' Cabinet and like Gullis, Holloway, Dorries, Jenkyn, Berry etc ultimately backed Truss over Sunak. Kruger backed Braverman not Sunak too. None of the current or ex Tory MPs who have defected to Reform backed Sunak in 2022.

    Most Truss backers backed Jenrick in the Tory leadership election in late 2024 too while most Sunak backers backed Badenoch in the final round (though many Sunak backers also supported Cleverly before he was knocked out in the last 3)
    Yes, it's a move that tells you more about Z's career prospects than the state of the Conservative Party.

    Btw, I saw from our local news feed today that a motorist was jailed for killing a motorcyclist despite the latter doing about 60/70 mph in a 30mph area. I was surprised at this, and thought it lent some weight to the arguments you have been forwarding recently. I thought it only right to mention this even though I found the subject less riveting than Scottish SubSamples and AV.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 31,664
    It's interesting to see how the narrative around Musk / Grok and 'nudified' images is developing.

    GBNews (Andrew Pierce, and I think Isabelle Parkin) are supporting Ofcom, and also "no social media for under 16s").
    https://www.gbnews.com/news/elon-musk-x-under-investigation-ofcom-grok-sexual-images

  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 57,273
    edited 3:12PM

    Fun Fact: A paper airplane can be in flight yet remain stationery.

    Aeroplane, ffs.
    Airplane starred Leslie Nielsen and co.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 41,521
    Watching the clips, Zahawi has lost a lot of weight. Probably Ozempic
  • isamisam Posts: 43,335

    FF43 said:

    Zahawi moving from the Tories indicates the rats think the Reform ship at this moment is a lot more seaworthy than the Conservative one. That's a helpful indicator for Reform and bad news for the Tories.

    I hope Truss joins Reform as well

    And on today's Yougov, not only has Badenoch caught Starmer as best PM, she has moved well ahead of Farage and even leads Davey

    She is being noticed and has greatly improved

    Sky is just reporting that Zahawi asked for a peerage but the conservatives turned him down, so maybe Farage will give him one
    Fnar fnar
  • MattWMattW Posts: 31,664
    DavidL said:

    MattW said:

    DavidL said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    Thanks for this, Ben, and "Ho, hum" for my predictions.

    Does anyone get the impression that there seemed to be very little reviewing of 2025 both on PB and across the wider media? If ever a year slipped into history unloved and unmarked, 2025 was it, and perhaps it is a wider malaise than simply Starmer or Trump or any one of the news stories this year.

    And yet, and this is true for most years, and is an important corollary to the go and vote / politics is vital brigade: how often does politics directly turn the course of somebody's life on here? Despite Trump, despite Labour, despite war and refugees and all, most years and last year, the effects of politics on my life were very much at the margins and I think most people can say the same. So, however mad it gets out there, remember it remains a niche and peripheral interest.

    Perhaps politics will come for me this year, and perhaps it is naive to be complacent about it, but more likely "They'll burn down the synagogues at 6 o'clock, and we'll all carry on like before".

    Nice Del Amitri reference.
    DavidL said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    Thanks for this, Ben, and "Ho, hum" for my predictions.

    Does anyone get the impression that there seemed to be very little reviewing of 2025 both on PB and across the wider media? If ever a year slipped into history unloved and unmarked, 2025 was it, and perhaps it is a wider malaise than simply Starmer or Trump or any one of the news stories this year.

    And yet, and this is true for most years, and is an important corollary to the go and vote / politics is vital brigade: how often does politics directly turn the course of somebody's life on here? Despite Trump, despite Labour, despite war and refugees and all, most years and last year, the effects of politics on my life were very much at the margins and I think most people can say the same. So, however mad it gets out there, remember it remains a niche and peripheral interest.

    Perhaps politics will come for me this year, and perhaps it is naive to be complacent about it, but more likely "They'll burn down the synagogues at 6 o'clock, and we'll all carry on like before".

    Nice Del Amitri reference.
    I picked up several podcast and Youtube commentator reviews; my usual for decades has been R4 "The Correspondents Look Ahead", which I used to record on cassette to relisten before the next one.

    Probably the best from for me were Mallen Baker, Anne Applebaum and I think Legal Eagle.

    I think we will see an upswing in podcasts that are 30 minutes rather than an hour.
    So.....you plan to cheat in the next competition? Well done!
    I don't think any of them are PB-far down the rabbit hole !
  • isamisam Posts: 43,335
    edited 3:19PM
    HYUFD said:

    FF43 said:

    Zahawi moving from the Tories indicates the rats think the Reform ship at this moment is a lot more seaworthy than the Conservative one. That's a helpful indicator for Reform and bad news for the Tories.

    No, more an indication of the aftermath of the 2022 Tory leadership and toppling of Boris still.

    Zahawi, like Berry served in Liz Truss' Cabinet and like Gullis, Holloway, Dorries, Jenkyn, Berry etc ultimately backed Truss over Sunak. Kruger backed Braverman not Sunak too. None of the current or ex Tory MPs who have defected to Reform backed Sunak in 2022.

    Most Truss backers backed Jenrick in the Tory leadership election in late 2024 too while most Sunak backers backed Badenoch in the final round (though many Sunak backers also supported Cleverly before he was knocked out in the last 3)
    Astute observation. Kemi's leadership has been strengthened by the type of people she has lost. I saw an article noting that Starmer has also benefitted from the type that have left the Labour membership - if it came to a vote now, he has a bigger proportion of backers than before. Obviously this could get absurd if he is the only one left!
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 18,923

    FF43 said:

    eek said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sandpit said:

    Congratulations to @Driver on the win, and to @Benpointer for organising.

    Sets reminder to self, to remember to enter the competition this year!

    We're just finalising the questions.

    We've got some proper elections to predict in 2026.
    There were national elections in Germany, Canada and Australia last year.

    This year the only major national elections are the US midterms and the New Zealand election
    Q1. Will the 2026 US midterms be free and fair? A1 Yes 0 :No 10 points.
    They probably will overall, it is state governments that run them not the Federal government anyway
    US elections are never that fair, because gerrymandering is so embedded.

    Has anyone done a list of who controls the process in the competitive districts? It shouldn't matter, but unfortunately it might.
    I’m always shocked at the amount of political micromanaging that goes on around US elections, with town mayors deciding things such as the location and opening hours of ballot boxes.

    Which of course they engineer to make sure their opponents’ voters face long queues, it’s all quite nakedly partisan.

    The US House is now so Gerrymandered that only a couple of dozen seats change hands, even when there’s a relatively large swing in the vote.

    Even attempts to tighten up rules such as voter ID, are fought along party lines.
    Downside of the "direct electoral accountability for everything" model that the USA tends towards.

    Some things are better done by technocrats working to explicit and democratically-agreed mandates.
    Yes, for all that we critisise politics the UK is actually very good at organising elections themselves.

    We generally wake up in the morning after a general election, with a pretty good idea of what’s happening. Only 2010 comes to mind as being up in the air for a few days, at least since the ‘70s.
    I don't think Ireland, with a fully proportional system takes much longer, does it?
    Generally speaking Ireland takes two days to get most of the count completed, though everyone has a pretty good idea of the overall result by the first lunchtime because the party workers observing the count (called tallymen) come up with very accurate tallies much more quickly. This is probably why they don't simply double/triple the number of counters in order to get the count completed in one day.

    It took quite a long time after the last election to finalise the coalition deal, nearly two months. I think in the end they only felt the need to get it done so that a government was in place before Trump was inaugurated.

    Ireland's system is STV, which is slower to count than a simple, directly proportional system, would be.
    STV is a shite system. The number of seats a party wins in a constituency is influenced by how many candidates they field.

    No such nonsense with D'Hondt. The gold standard system for multi-member constituencies.
    More correctly the number of seats a party wins is influenced by how the voters react to the number of candidates the party fields, and the qualities of those candidates.

    No other electoral system gives the voters as much power to select the party affiliation and individual qualities of the politician they wish to represent them.

    Short of banning political parties I can't think of an electoral system that more effectively minimises the power of political parties. Whereas party list PR puts the party bureaucracy even more in control than with FPTP.
    The 2 downsides of STV are the time it takes to count and the fact parties can game the system by just standing the number of candidates they expect to win as candidates.

    Which means that a political party who does unexpectedly well (say Sinn Fein in the last set of Irish elections) end up winning only the seats they've put candidates up for when they could have won another 10-20 seats.

    I don't think time taken to count the vote is a downside if it leads to a more representative/better result.

    It is true you optimally want to stand the number of candidates that you might win on a good day, but not more than that. I would count that as an undesirable quirk of the STV method - ideally you wouldn't be penalised for providing more candidates - but no-one's gaming the system. Everyone understands the calculation. In general you want to stand as many candidates as you might win. Sinn Fein miscalculated. It was their fault.
    So you agree that the number of SF members elected was not a true reflection of the level of support for SF under this so-called "proportional" system?
    If you don't put up a candidate you can't be elected under any voting system, so I don't agree about true reflection.

    Parties don't want voters under STV to select candidates from their slate who are unlikely to be elected, or even worse choose candidates of the other party, over their candidates that have a good chance. They mitigate this by reducing the number of candidates electors can select. This might be an undesirable incentive but as far as I know STV isn't doing anything other reflect voters' choices as stated. They have the right to choose other candidates not on a party's list.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 9,299

    HYUFD said:

    FF43 said:

    Zahawi moving from the Tories indicates the rats think the Reform ship at this moment is a lot more seaworthy than the Conservative one. That's a helpful indicator for Reform and bad news for the Tories.

    No, more an indication of the aftermath of the 2022 Tory leadership and toppling of Boris still.

    Zahawi, like Berry served in Liz Truss' Cabinet and like Gullis, Holloway, Dorries, Jenkyn, Berry etc ultimately backed Truss over Sunak. Kruger backed Braverman not Sunak too. None of the current or ex Tory MPs who have defected to Reform backed Sunak in 2022.

    Most Truss backers backed Jenrick in the Tory leadership election in late 2024 too while most Sunak backers backed Badenoch in the final round (though many Sunak backers also supported Cleverly before he was knocked out in the last 3)
    Yes, it's a move that tells you more about Z's career prospects than the state of the Conservative Party.

    Btw, I saw from our local news feed today that a motorist was jailed for killing a motorcyclist despite the latter doing about 60/70 mph in a 30mph area. I was surprised at this, and thought it lent some weight to the arguments you have been forwarding recently. I thought it only right to mention this even though I found the subject less riveting than Scottish SubSamples and AV.
    Oh no. If the driving thing kicks off again you are entirely to blame.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 21,585
    Scott_xP said:

    Watching the clips, Zahawi has lost a lot of weight. Probably Ozempic

    My sister and husband have suspiciously lost 3-4 stone each over the year. Was taken in at first but the truth came out at Christmas. We'll see what happens when the year's use is up. Data suggests rebound when you stop taking GLP1 agonists.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 31,664

    HYUFD said:

    'Best Prime Minister Polling:

    Starmer Vs Farage:
    🌹 Starmer: 36% (+1)
    ➡️ Farage: 29% (+1)

    Starmer Vs Badenoch:
    🌹Starmer: 28% (-2)
    🌳 Badenoch: 28% (+8)

    Farage Vs Badenoch:
    🌳 Badenoch: 31% (+10)
    ➡️ Farage: 21% (-2)

    Via
    @YouGov
    , 6-7 Jan.
    Changes w/ 3-4 Aug.'
    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/2010674640532746643?s=20

    Good morning

    Excellent progress for Kemi especially in regard to Farage

    May she continue her progress
    It is suggesting in those numbers, those who tell pollsters they will vote Reform, actually prefer Kemi as PM, that’s important if “party support” in mid term is protest vote and preferred PM more indicative of what happens in May 29.

    However ultimately we have to confess, Kemi’s Achilles Heel right now, unless it can be mitigated, is, as far as she has one, the party’s policy platform. “Cavemen done just fine without a welfare state” for example.

    A Conservative Rise at expense of Reform may move everything towards a 1983 result, a split tribe cancels itself out allowing “majority unliked” government a landslide.
    Predicting the next GE becomes even more uncertain.

    I think a window is plausibly opening for the Badenoch Tories to essentially present themselves as the radical small-state, deregulating, low tax, free enterprise brooms. If they can sound plausible on immigration and asylum matters too, then they essentially inhabit a decent ground on the political spectrum to win back traditional centre-right voters, some of the professional classes and those for whom a Reform vote is possible but who cannot bring themselves to vote for Farage when the crunch point comes.

    Now that coalition in and of itself probably wouldn’t win them more than 35% of the electorate absolute tops, but that would be more than enough to keep them relevant and on current fragmentation could even win them an election (no laughing at the back).

    This is admittedly an overly-optimistic scenario but losing some of the old guard to Reform likely helps them in this situation. The two main problems they have are (a) infighting and leadership - if they’re going to go in on this, they have to look credible and to look credible they are going to have to stick with Badenoch as leader - anything else undermines the narrative of stability etc (b) any sensible reform of benefits in this country requires a discussion around the triple lock and the oldies are one part of their voter coalition they will find it hard to lose.
    I know what you are saying, but there’s a reason for being reduced to just 120 MPs, how quickly will that be forgotten?

    Reform keep banging on about “Boris Wave” the Conservative Government record on immigration, securing the borders, and assimilation of migrants to UK values, whilst Labour keep banging on about the last Conservative governments records on NHS, public services, cost of living - it’s possible that improvements in coming years on those things the, sitting government gets credit for.

    To what extent does the May, Boris, Truss, Sunak government record still hurt the Conservatives not just in 2029, but the 2030’s elections too?

    In the bigger picture to this, psephological comparisons with today and the 2 party past, just cannot be made anymore imo - it’s two different things now so comparing can’t neatly read across - same with “worst satisfaction ratings ever” questions.

    However, correct me where wrong, what interests me is the current governments “true comparison” - and how, as explained above, lot of pebble counting stats don’t read across so leaves us with “psychological hunch’s” - with Lady Thatchers turbulent and unpopular first term.

    What saved the Conservatives in 1983 General Election was neatly split opposition votes, whilst what delivered a landslide win in 1987 was the improved economy, and concern the opposition would fuck it up. You can be in government through some turbulent and unpopular years, and then as a party get even better results.

    And where you say credibility in 2029 can only come from sticking with Kemi, credibility in 2029 would also be the policy platform Kemi is tied to - and if it’s not a popular policy platform across the electorate, is one reason she would be sent to Leadership Graveyard. But, if trying to get the best possible result up from 120 MPs is that a “best way to stop a PM Farage is Vote Conservative” message - that would need credibility in policy platform to back it up. Do Conservatives junk Kemi to junk her policies for others with broader appeal across all electorate, or junk Kemi in attempt to out battle Farage with Jenrick?
    Ructions seem to be incoming around the RefUK London Mayoral candidate - Ant Middleton & his supporters are kicking off a little. That is a potential split on the right to match the one on the left.

    We want MORE candidates !!
  • isamisam Posts: 43,335
    Scott_xP said:

    Watching the clips, Zahawi has lost a lot of weight. Probably Ozempic

    "and some height..."

    He looked bright red! it was a bit odd when he said something along the lines of "If Nigel didn't like the colour of my skin I wouldn't be here".

    I am becoming more convinced that Farage won't be PM. Maybe something has changed in him with the prospect of actually being in charge, or that Kemi makes him seem a bit tired in comparison. Whatever the reason, I think he should do a deal with the new Tories, rather than become a retirement home for the old ones.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 57,157

    HYUFD said:

    FF43 said:

    Zahawi moving from the Tories indicates the rats think the Reform ship at this moment is a lot more seaworthy than the Conservative one. That's a helpful indicator for Reform and bad news for the Tories.

    No, more an indication of the aftermath of the 2022 Tory leadership and toppling of Boris still.

    Zahawi, like Berry served in Liz Truss' Cabinet and like Gullis, Holloway, Dorries, Jenkyn, Berry etc ultimately backed Truss over Sunak. Kruger backed Braverman not Sunak too. None of the current or ex Tory MPs who have defected to Reform backed Sunak in 2022.

    Most Truss backers backed Jenrick in the Tory leadership election in late 2024 too while most Sunak backers backed Badenoch in the final round (though many Sunak backers also supported Cleverly before he was knocked out in the last 3)
    Yes, it's a move that tells you more about Z's career prospects than the state of the Conservative Party.

    Btw, I saw from our local news feed today that a motorist was jailed for killing a motorcyclist despite the latter doing about 60/70 mph in a 30mph area. I was surprised at this, and thought it lent some weight to the arguments you have been forwarding recently. I thought it only right to mention this even though I found the subject less riveting than Scottish SubSamples and AV.
    Oh no. If the driving thing kicks off again you are entirely to blame.
    Knock it off!!!
  • MattWMattW Posts: 31,664
    edited 3:35PM
    Perun on Trump's Adventures by Proxy in Venezuela: "An American SMO"
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APmgHMDOObk

    (He's been practicing his pronunciation - he sounds like Pamela Stephenson talking about "guerillas".)
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 21,585
    Love the photo of Farage and Zahawi - all ready for a classic Private Eye caption...



    "This idiot thinks I'll give him a peerage"
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 85,187
    .

    Scott_xP said:

    @PippaCrerar

    ❤️‍🔥Tory sources confirm that Nadhim Zahawi made approaches to senior members of Kemi Badenoch's team about getting a peerage just weeks before defecting to Reform UK - but was turned down.

    Tory source: "Nadhim asked for a peerage several times. Given he was sacked for his dodgy tax affairs, this was never going to happen. His defection tells you everything you need to know about Reform being a repository for disgraced politicians."

    https://x.com/PippaCrerar/status/2010714449749877149?s=20

    Captain Renault applies.
    He wouldn't qualify for a peerage, either.
    (Wrong nationality, in his case.(
  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 3,412
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    FF43 said:

    Zahawi moving from the Tories indicates the rats think the Reform ship at this moment is a lot more seaworthy than the Conservative one. That's a helpful indicator for Reform and bad news for the Tories.

    No, more an indication of the aftermath of the 2022 Tory leadership and toppling of Boris still.

    Zahawi, like Berry served in Liz Truss' Cabinet and like Gullis, Jenkyn etc backed Truss over Sunak. Kruger backed Braverman not Sunak too.

    Most Truss backers backed Jenrick in the Tory leadership election in late 2024 too while most Sunak backers backed Badenoch in the final round (though many Sunak backers also supported Cleverly before he was knocked out in the last 3)
    TBF Kemi has repelled quite a lot of vile dross.

    Her party might even become electable again if she could jettison Patel, Braverman and Bob.
    Maybe the first two but Jenrick is an effective opposition performer
    I think Jenrick's strategy is to be the "Unite the Right" candidate if Labour hang on at the next election, and the result is blamed on a split in the right.

    Farage, by then 65, would probably retire regardless, and Kemi may go too depending on how the Tories perform (ie, if they are behind Reform, she would go.) He would be the obvious person to fill the double-vacancy.

    So I don't expect him to move on the leadership proactively in the meantime.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 9,845
    edited 3:45PM
    Tres said:

    Further evidence for the Badenoch isn't half as bright as she believes she is club.


    https://bsky.app/profile/jamesdaustin.bsky.social/post/3mc7l6legus2u

    There's an xkcd for that :lol:

    ETA: Although if, as Kemi states, we're taking about Britain, then Scotland is astonishingly crime free. Well done SNP!

    ETA2: So humble pie for me actually. The map says it's by LSOA, which are (loosely) population based. So more urban versus rural crime rates if true (although dots are an odd way to show LSOAs and it's surprising if on that basis that there are apparently no large rural ones represented).
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 85,187

    HYUFD said:

    FF43 said:

    Zahawi moving from the Tories indicates the rats think the Reform ship at this moment is a lot more seaworthy than the Conservative one. That's a helpful indicator for Reform and bad news for the Tories.

    No, more an indication of the aftermath of the 2022 Tory leadership and toppling of Boris still.

    Zahawi, like Berry served in Liz Truss' Cabinet and like Gullis, Jenkyn etc backed Truss over Sunak. Kruger backed Braverman not Sunak too.

    Most Truss backers backed Jenrick in the Tory leadership election in late 2024 too while most Sunak backers backed Badenoch in the final round (though many Sunak backers also supported Cleverly before he was knocked out in the last 3)
    TBF Kemi has repelled quite a lot of vile dross. .
    That's no way to describe the electorate.
  • TazTaz Posts: 23,905
    MelonB said:

    Taz said:

    DavidL said:

    Nigelb said:

    More socialism on the cards...

    U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright says the U.S. taking ownership stakes in oil companies is a real possibility, signaling a major shift in energy and national security strategy.
    https://x.com/zywiremedia1/status/2010387313931813070

    Typical government inefficiency. If the oil companies just issued shares to DJT they would get on a lot better.
    The curious thing is that a number of the things that Trump is doing are insane, corrupt versions of what sane people would do.

    For example, round the world, many countries with oil have some kind of golden share setup (at least) with the national oil companies. If not an outright state oil company.

    The crackdown on share buybacks is something that many observers have advocated - if Boeing had invested about 20% of the money it spent n share buy backs, it would have been able to develop 2-3 totally new aircraft. No 737 MAX. Aerospace inflation in the traditional prime defence contractors is out of control - see the price for the new US ICBM.

    Etc etc...
    Banning share buy backs for ftse100 companies was Lib Dem policy at the last election.
    Fake news.

    The Lib Dem manifesto proposed a tax on share buybacks, something already in place in the USA and introduced by the Biden administration.

    I disagree with the policy - we don’t have the same distortions in the tax code that necessitated the US move - but of course they didn’t propose a ban.
    Then I misremembered. As JNT said, the memory cheats.

    I agree with you on the merits of the policy.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 18,923
    edited 3:44PM

    FF43 said:

    Zahawi moving from the Tories indicates the rats think the Reform ship at this moment is a lot more seaworthy than the Conservative one. That's a helpful indicator for Reform and bad news for the Tories.

    Well, that depends on whether the "rats" have made the right judgement call. Not sure if would place the judgement of Nadine Dorries, Andrea Jenkyns, and Nadhim Zahawi particularly high.

    This judgement, issued by The Guardian in the wake of the Zahawi announcement, seems pretty sound:

    "Almost without exception, recruits from the Tories to Farage have all come from the more shifty, opportunist wing of the party (other adjectives are available)". You could add to that "self important" and "entitled".

    So Captain Badenoch has made the Tory ship a rat-free zone? Hmm.

    I think the timing is interesting however. Why didn't Zahawi make his move 6 to 12 months ago?

    Unlike many on here I don't really buy the Kemiwave. Maybe some prejudice because I find her deeply unimpressive, but I'm also aware the best chance of avoiding Farage as PM is if the Conservatives get back vote share, so I should be emphatically Team Kemi, who isn't actually malign.

    The problem is in the numbers. Badenoch took over a party that was already the worst place in its 200 year history and plunged it further into the doldrums. She's clawed back some vote share but nowhere near where she first started. And if you say, what about popularity ratings? I would counter that by pointing out Zack Polanski has higher ratings, and as I recall Corbyn had sky high ratings at certain points. That doesn't always translate into likely additional Tory seats at the next election. The reverse in fact.

    Given that, is it surprising if Zahawi thinks, sod them, I'll hitch up with a party that wins seats?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 132,874
    edited 3:50PM

    HYUFD said:

    FF43 said:

    Zahawi moving from the Tories indicates the rats think the Reform ship at this moment is a lot more seaworthy than the Conservative one. That's a helpful indicator for Reform and bad news for the Tories.

    No, more an indication of the aftermath of the 2022 Tory leadership and toppling of Boris still.

    Zahawi, like Berry served in Liz Truss' Cabinet and like Gullis, Holloway, Dorries, Jenkyn, Berry etc ultimately backed Truss over Sunak. Kruger backed Braverman not Sunak too. None of the current or ex Tory MPs who have defected to Reform backed Sunak in 2022.

    Most Truss backers backed Jenrick in the Tory leadership election in late 2024 too while most Sunak backers backed Badenoch in the final round (though many Sunak backers also supported Cleverly before he was knocked out in the last 3)
    Yes, it's a move that tells you more about Z's career prospects than the state of the Conservative Party.

    Btw, I saw from our local news feed today that a motorist was jailed for killing a motorcyclist despite the latter doing about 60/70 mph in a 30mph area. I was surprised at this, and thought it lent some weight to the arguments you have been forwarding recently. I thought it only right to mention this even though I found the subject less riveting than Scottish SubSamples and AV.
    Thanks though in that case it seems the driver was more than double the legal limit for alcohol in his system so was charged with death by careless driving under the influence of alcohol rather than just standard death by careless driving

    He has been convicted but sentencing is in March I believe, had he not been drinking he would likely just have got a community order and/or suspended sentence, with the drinking he will likely be jailed

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn9zvrx4wlpo
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 9,845
    Selebian said:

    Tres said:

    Further evidence for the Badenoch isn't half as bright as she believes she is club.


    https://bsky.app/profile/jamesdaustin.bsky.social/post/3mc7l6legus2u

    There's an xkcd for that :lol:

    ETA: Although if, as Kemi states, we're taking about Britain, then Scotland is astonishingly crime free. Well done SNP!

    ETA2: So humble pie for me actually. The map says it's by LSOA, which are (loosely) population based. So more urban versus rural crime rates if true (although dots are an odd way to show LSOAs and it's surprising if on that basis that there are apparently no large rural ones represented).
    Presumably dots at centre of LSOA? I'd have gone for shading myself. Maybe there are some rural ones, hard to tell from this. But if you put dots in the middle of LSOAs then you are going to get a sparse map that reflects population distribution as the LSOAs are geographically smaller and more clustered in those centres.

    Conclusion - bad map and silly Kemi
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 132,874
    edited 3:51PM
    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    Zahawi moving from the Tories indicates the rats think the Reform ship at this moment is a lot more seaworthy than the Conservative one. That's a helpful indicator for Reform and bad news for the Tories.

    Well, that depends on whether the "rats" have made the right judgement call. Not sure if would place the judgement of Nadine Dorries, Andrea Jenkyns, and Nadhim Zahawi particularly high.

    This judgement, issued by The Guardian in the wake of the Zahawi announcement, seems pretty sound:

    "Almost without exception, recruits from the Tories to Farage have all come from the more shifty, opportunist wing of the party (other adjectives are available)". You could add to that "self important" and "entitled".

    So Captain Badenoch has made the Tory ship a rat-free zone? Hmm.

    I think the timing is interesting however. Why didn't Zahawi make his move 6 to 12 months ago?

    Unlike many on here I don't really buy the Kemiwave. Maybe some prejudice because I find her deeply unimpressive, but I'm also aware the best chance of avoiding Farage as PM is if the Conservatives get back vote share, so I should be emphatically Team Kemi, who isn't actually malign.

    The problem is in the numbers. Badenoch took over a party that was already the worst place in its 200 year history and plunged it further into the doldrums. She's clawed back some vote share but nowhere near where she first started. And if you say, what about popularity ratings? I would counter that by pointing out Zack Polanski has higher ratings, and as I recall Corbyn had sky high ratings at certain points. That doesn't always translate into likely additional Tory seats at the next election. The reverse in fact.

    Given that, is it surprising if Zahawi thinks, sod them, I'll hitch up with a party that wins seats?
    Badenoch ties Starmer as preferred PM with Yougov today and the poll also has her leading Farage, Polanski and Davey as preferred PM.

    Starmer leads Polanski and Farage as preferred PM though, so in terms of swing voters Kemi is making real progress in terms of those key voters at least considering the Conservatives again

    https://x.com/YouGov/status/2010670613103341971?s=20
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 21,585
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    FF43 said:

    Zahawi moving from the Tories indicates the rats think the Reform ship at this moment is a lot more seaworthy than the Conservative one. That's a helpful indicator for Reform and bad news for the Tories.

    No, more an indication of the aftermath of the 2022 Tory leadership and toppling of Boris still.

    Zahawi, like Berry served in Liz Truss' Cabinet and like Gullis, Holloway, Dorries, Jenkyn, Berry etc ultimately backed Truss over Sunak. Kruger backed Braverman not Sunak too. None of the current or ex Tory MPs who have defected to Reform backed Sunak in 2022.

    Most Truss backers backed Jenrick in the Tory leadership election in late 2024 too while most Sunak backers backed Badenoch in the final round (though many Sunak backers also supported Cleverly before he was knocked out in the last 3)
    Yes, it's a move that tells you more about Z's career prospects than the state of the Conservative Party.

    Btw, I saw from our local news feed today that a motorist was jailed for killing a motorcyclist despite the latter doing about 60/70 mph in a 30mph area. I was surprised at this, and thought it lent some weight to the arguments you have been forwarding recently. I thought it only right to mention this even though I found the subject less riveting than Scottish SubSamples and AV.
    Thanks though in that case it seems the driver was more than double the legal limit for alcohol in his system so was charged with death by careless driving under the influence of alcohol rather than just standard death by careless driving

    He has been convicted but sentencing is in March I believe, had he not been drinking he would likely just have got a community order and/or suspended sentence, with the drinking he will likely be jailed

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn9zvrx4wlpo
    This is exactly the kind of case I wonder about. We have no way of knowing if the 'drunk' driver is responsible for the speeding motorcyclists death. If he was stone cold sober could he have done something different? Possibly? We will never know. I guess he has put himself in the firing line by drinking and driving.
Sign In or Register to comment.